Rec'd 


/ о . 


; * с. 


I' 


к • 
W: 

І^У,- 

f-.K',  ■ 

І*1л;' 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2017  with  funding  from 
Duke  University  Libraries 


https://archive.org/details/warchristianity01solo 


ъ . 


, 


г»* 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


War  and  Christianity 

FROM  THE  RUSSIAN  POINT  OF  VIEW 
THREE  CONVERSATIONS  BY 

VLADIMIR  SOLOVYOF 

WITH  an  introduction  by 

STEPHEN 

GRAHAM 


I 

N 

Ж 

NEW  YORK 


G.  P.  PUTNAM’S  SONS 


Printed  in  Great  Britain. 


PREFACE 


Vladimir  Solovyof,  the  author  of  this  book,  is 
Russia’s  greatest  philosopher  and  one  of  the  greatest 
of  her  poets,  a serene  and  happy  writer.  He  was 
bom  in  1853  and  died  in  1901,  that  is,  he  flourished 
in  Russia  during  the  same  years  that  Nietzsche  lived 
in  Germany.  He  was  a seeker  and  also  a seer,  a 
thinker  and  also  a singer.  His  hfe  is  not  marked  by 
irritability,  and  it  did  not  culminate  in  mental  and 
psychic  collapse  as  did  the  life  of  Nietzsche.  Prob- 
ably life  was  easier  for  a man  of  genius  in  Russia 
than  in  Germany — there  are  wider  spaces  there, 
more  freedom,  more  tenderness  between  man  and 
man,  less  materialism,  less  selfishness,  less  to  send 
one  mad. 

Solovyof  came  from  a happy  home  and  of  a 
literary  family.  His  father.  Serge  Mikhalovitch 
Solovyof,  was  a historian  ; his  mother,  a Little 
Russian  of  old  family  and  culture,  was  proud  to 
remind  her  children  of  a kinsman  who  had  been  a 
great  philosopher  in  his  day.  At  home  there  was 
an  atmosphere  of  real  things — never  any  of  the 
cheap  wit  and  vulgarism  and  mental  meanness  that 
so  often  sterilise  the  creative  intelligence  of  other- 
wise wonderful  children.  There  was  much  reading 
aloud  and  many  lively  discussions  about  life  and 


VI 


PREFACE 


religion.  Every  one  of  Solovyof’s  brothers  and 
sisters  achieved  distinction  in  life  and  letters  later 
on.  Vladimir  was,  however,  the  greatest  and 
showed  his  gifts  from  the  first. 

The  young  man’s  distinctive  tone  in  thought  was 
opposition  to  positivism,  humanitarianism  and  the 
ideas  of  Western  civilisation,  and  throughout  his 
student  days  he  propounded  in  many  arguments  a 
lively  belief  in  Russia  and  the  Russian  idea,  in 
orthodoxy  and  mysticism.  But  with  all  his 
brilliance  he  was  also  an  industrious  scholar.  He 
graduated  in  1873,  and  gave  many  of  the  succeeding 
years  of  youth  to  research  and  study.  He  held  a 
professorship  for  a short  while,  but  gave  up  his 
chair  in  1882,  and  the  remaining  eighteen  years 
of  his  life  were  devoted  almost  entirely  to  literary 
work. 

As  a poet  he  was,  nearest  to  Fete,  one  of  the  most 
delicate  of  Russian  poets.  Solovyof  was  the  first 
poet  philosopher  of  his  country,  the  first  to  speak 
simply  and  beautifully  in  verse  of  the  most  difficult 
problems  of  man’s  life  and  religion.  In  his  works 
you  may  seek  and  find  the  Russian  idea,  the  Eastern 
Christian  point  of  view.  His  philosophy  derives  in 
part  from  gnostic  Christianity,  and  is  associated  with 
the  idea  of  St.  Sophia  rather  than  the  idea  of  St. 
Peter,  with  eternal  visdom  rather  than  eternal  law. 

It  would  be  impossible  to  sum  up  in  a sentence 
the  author’s  majestical  vision  of  life,  but  we  may 
cite  an  exclamation  from  one  of  his  poems  : 

“ All  evil  is  powerless,  man  is  for  ever,  and  God  is  with 


PREFACE 


vii 

In  national  culture  Solovyof  owned  DostoieEsky 
as  his  prophet.  With  Dostoieffsky  he  was  one  of 
the  great  spiritual  leaders  of  the  Russian  people. 
He  was  in  all  his  work  and  faith  opposed  to  Tolstoy, 
considering  Tolstoyism  to  be  a sort  of  moral  atrophy. 
Yet  he  never  attacked  Tolstoy  by  name,  and  was 
never  mixed  up  in  any  acrid  controversy.  The 
accompanying  volume  is  one  of  the  chief  of  those 
in  which  Tolstoyism  and  positivism  are  combated. 
At  the  present  moment,  when  recurring  war  has 
caused  much  heart-searching  in  the  minds  of 
Christian  people,  it  has  been  thought  most  fitting  to 
issue  a translation  of  this  Russian  book. 

War  has  not  prompted  so  many  misgivings  in 
Christian  Russia  as  it  has  done  in  the  humanitarian 
and  materialistic  West.  It  is  felt  that — 

“ Religion  is  never  shaken  down  by  war,  but 
logicians  are  shaken  in  their  logic,  agnosticism  is 
shaken,  materialism  is  shaken,  atheism  is  shaken, 
positivism  is  shaken.  The  intellectual  dominance 
is  shaken  and  falls,  the  spiritual  powers  are  allowed 
to  take  possession  of  men’s  being.” 

Solovyof  issued  “War  and  Christianity  ” on 
Easter  Day,  1900,  the  year  before  his  death.  Accord- 
ing to  Valery  Brusof,  one  of  the  most  interesting 
of  contemporary  Russian  essayists — 

" Towards  the  end  of  Solovyof's  life  a sort  of  special 
power  and  intensity  of  perception  seemed  to  show  itself  in 
his  work.  The  poet  and  thinker  approached  the  most 
sacred  problems  of  contemporary  man.  . . . Everyone 
was  listening  to  the  powerful  voice  of  Solovyof  as  to  the 
words  of  a master  ; his  right  to  judge  was  acknowledged. 
. . . Death  unexpectedly  cut  short  this  teaching  so  neces- 
sary to  us.  . . . But,  bewaring  of  superfluous  lamentation. 


PREFACE 


viii 

let  us  call  to  mind  that  he  himself  tried  to  find  a sense  and 
a moral  indispensability  even  in  the  shot  of  Dantes  and  the 
destruction  of  the  ‘ godly  phial ' as  if  it  were  a potter’s 
vessel.” 

Especial  thanks  are  due  to  Mr.  Edward  Cazalet, 
of  the  Anglo-Russian  Literary  Society,  who  trans- 
lated Conversation  II.,  and  to  Mr.  W.  J.  Barnes  and 
Mr.  H.  H.  Haynes,  who  translated  Conversation  III., 
and  to  Mr.  Barnes  who  saw  through  the  proofs. 

STEPHEN  GRAHAM. 

London, 

April,  1915. 


THE  SCENE 


In  the  garden  of  one  of  those  ѵШаз  which,  at  the 
foot  of  the  Alps,  look  down  on  the  blue  depths  of  the 
Mediterranean,  there  met  one  summer  five  Russians  : 
an  old  general,  of  many  campaigns,  we  shall  call 
him  the  General ; a politician,  a “ father  of  the 
Senate,”  resting  from  the  theoretical  and  practical 
occupations  of  State  affairs,  we  shall  call  him  the 
Politician  ; a young  prince,  a moralist  and  popular 
teacher,  responsible  for  the  editing  of  various  more 
or  less  helpful  pamphlets  on  moral  and  social 
questions,  we  shall  caJl  him  the  Prince  ; a lady  of 
middle  age,  interested  in  all  that  concerns  human 
beings,  she  is  the  Lady  ; and  the  fifth  was  a gentle- 
man of  doubtful  age  and  social  position,  let  us  call 
him  Mr.  Z. 

I was  a silent  listener  to  all  their  conversations, 
some  of  which  appeared  to  me  to  have  much  interest, 
and  whilst  they  were  fresh  in  my  memory  I wrote 
them  down.  The  first  conversation  was  begun  in 
my  absence.  I believe  it  started  apropos  of  some 
newspaper  article  or  peace  pamphlet  on  the  subject 
of  the  campaign  against  war  and  mfiitary  service, 
which  was  being  carried  on  by  the  Baroness  Luttner 
and  Mr.  Stead,  following  in  the  footsteps  of  Tolstoy. 

The  Politician,  on  being  asked  by  the  Lady 

b 


w.c. 


X 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


whether  he  thought  the  peace  movement  was  a good 
one,  gave  it  as  his  opinion  that  it  was  weU-intentioned 
and  useful.  At  that,  the  General  got  angry  and 
began  to  make  satirical  jests  at  the  expense  of  these 
three  writers,  calling  them  the  true  pillars  of  State 
wisdom,  guiding  constellations  on  the  political 
horizon,  even  calling  them  the  three  whales  of 
Russia.  The  Politician  remarked  that  there  were 
other  fish.  This  remark  caused  Mr.  Z.  to  collapse 
with  laughter,  and  he  forced  both  the  speakers  to 
confess  that  they  considered  a whale  was  a fish,  and 
even  persuaded  them  to  give  a conjoint  definition  of 
what  they  thought  a fish  to  be,  that  is,  an  animal 
belonging  partly  to  the  marine  department  and 
partly  to  the  department  of  marine  communications. 
I think,  however,  this  was  an  invention  of  Mr.  Z. 
Be  that  as  it  may,  I was  not  fortunate  enough  to 
obtain  the  real  beginning  of  the  conversation. 
Being  afraid  to  compose  out  of  my  own  head  after 
the  model  of  Plato  and  his  imitators,  I began  my 
transcript  with  the  words  of  the  General  which  I 
heard  as  I approached  the  speakers. 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


FIRST  CONVERSATION 

” Audiatur  et  prima  pars.” 

General  {agitated,  stands  up  and  then  sits  down 
again,  speaking  in  rapid  gestures). — No,  permit  me  ! 
Tell  me  only  one  thing  : does  a “ Christ-serving  and 
worthy  Russian  militancy  ” ^ exist  or  not  ? Yes 
or  no  ? 

Politician  {stretching  himself  on  his  deck-chair 
and  speaking  in  a tone  which  reminds  one  of  something 
between  that  of  the  careless  gods  of  Epicurus,  of  a 
Prussian  officer  and  of  Voltaire). — Does  a Russian 
army  exist  ? Obviously  it  exists.  Surely  you 
haven’t  heard  that  it  is  dismissed  ? 

General. — Now,  don’t  sham.  You  understand 
quite  well  about  what  I am  speaking.  I ask,  have 
I still  the  right  as  before  to  consider  the  existent 
army  as  a worthy  Christ-loving  militancy — or  is  this 
designation  out  of  date  and  should  we  change  it  for 
another  ? 

Politician. — Eh  ...  so  that’s  what  you’re  worry- 
ing yourself  about  ? You  shouldn’t  address  that 
question  to  me,  but  rather  to  the  department  of 
heraldry  where  the  various  titles  are  supervised. 

* A traditional  title  of  the  Russian  army. 

В 


W.C. 


2 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


Mr.  Z. — The  department  of  heraldry  would  prob- 
ably answer  that  the  use  of  old  titles  is  not  objected 
to  legally.  Did  not  the  last  Prince  Luzinian  call 
himself  King  of  Cyprus,  and  nobody  said  him  nay, 
though  not  only  did  he  not  rule  Cyprus,  but  was  not 
even  rich  enough  to  drink  Cyprus  wine  ? So  why 
shouldn’t  our  contemporary  army  have  the  title  of 
a Christ-serving  militancy  ? 

General. — What  has  title  got  to  do  with  it  ? Is 
white  or  black  a title  ? Is  sweet  or  bitter  a title  ? 
Hero  or  scoundrel — are  they  titles  ? 

Mr.  Z. — Yes,  of  course.  I wasn’t  giving  my 
own  point  of  view,  but  rather  the  legahty  of  the 
matter. 

Lady  {to  Politician).— Why  are  you  hedging  over 
words  ? You  may  be  sure  the  General  wished  to 
put  a real  question  with  his  “ Chris t-ser\’ing  mili- 
tancy.” 

General. — Thank  you.  I did  wish,  and  do  stih 
wish,  to  say  just  this  : For  centuries,  and  up  to 
yesterday  itself,  every  military  man  had  a clear  con- 
science, whether  it  were  common  soldier  or  field- 
marshal  it  was  all  the  same  ; he  knew  and  felt  that 
he  was  serving  a good  and  important  end.  He  knew 
it  was  not  something  merely  useful,  as  for  instance, 
sanitation,  or  laundry- work,  but  in  the  highest 
sense,  something  fine,  noble,  honourable,  something 
in  which  in  the  past  the  very  best  people  had  ser\'ed, 
the  first  people,  the  leaders  of  nations,  heroes.  Our 
work  has  always  been  consecrated  and  magnified  in 
the  churches  and  has  become  famous  by  general 
consent.  But  suddenly  one  fine  morning  we  are 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


3 


told  that  we  have  got  to  forget  all  that,  and  that  we 
ought  to  interpret  our  position  in  this  God’s  world 
entirely  in  the  opposite  sense.  We  have  to  recognise 
that  the  profession  of  which  we  were  so  proud  is 
something  evil  and  damaging,  contrary  to  God's 
commandments  and  human  intelligence,  the  most 
dreadful  trouble  and  calamity.  We  are  told  that  all 
nations  must  combine  to  stop  it,  and  that  its  complete 
abolition  is  really  only  a matter  of  time. 

Prince. — But  surely,  you  must  have  heard  some 
time  or  other,  earlier  in  your  career,  voices  which 
condemned  war  and  military  service  as  a survival  of 
ancient  cannibalism.  ? 

General. — How  not  hear  it?  I heard  it  and 
read  it  in  various  languages,  but  I cannot  say  it  made 
much  impression  on  me.  I heard  it  and  forgot  it. 
But  now  we’ve  come  to  a different  position.  There’s 
no  getting  past  it.  So  I ask  : How  do  we  stand  ? 
How  ought  I,  that  is,  how  ought  any  army  man  to 
consider  himself,  how  ought  he  to  look  upon  him- 
self— as  a real  man  or  as  an  unnatural  monster  ? 
Ought  I to  take  myself  seriously  as  a worker  in  an 
honest  and  important  cause,  or  should  I be  horror- 
stricken  by  it,  repent  of  it,  and  humbly  beg  each 
civilian  to  forgive  me  my  professional  accursedness  ? 

Politician. — Why  put  the  question  so  fantas- 
tically ? It  is  as  if  we’d  been  asking  you  to  do  some- 
thing special.  The  new  demands  of  society  are  not 
made  upon  you,  but  upon  diplomatists  and  other 
civil  people  in  authority  who  are  very  little  interested 
either  in  your  accursedness  or  in  your  “ service  of 
Christ.”  We  only  ask  one  thing  of  you,  now  as 


4 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


before,  to  fulfil  without  asking  questions  the  orders 
of  your  superiors. 

General. — As  you  are  not  interested  in  military 
matters  you  naturally  think  I put  the  matter  fantas- 
tically. You  evidently  don’t  seem  to  know  that  on 
certain  occasions  the  commands  of  the  authorities 
are  to  the  effect  that  we  act  without  asking  for 
commands. 

Politician.— For  instance  ? 

General. — For  instance  : imagine  that  I am 
appointed  by  authority  as  head  of  a complete 
military  circuit.  I should  have  all  manner  of  duties 
in  that  position,  managing  the  troops  entrusted  to 
me.  I should  have  to  train  and  confirm  in  them  a 
certain  way  of  thinking.  I should  have  to  train 
their  wills  in  a certain  direction  and  tune  their  feel- 
ings to  a certain  harmony.  In  a word,  I should  have 
to  bring  them  up  to  their  destiny.  Very  лѵеіі.  I 
should  have  to  give  general  commands  to  the  troops 
for  the  attainment  of  that  end,  under  my  name  and 
personal  responsibility.  Well,  if  I addressed  myself 
to  superior  authority  to  find  out  exactly  what  I 
should  do,  should  I not  be  put  down  at  once  by  them 
as  an  old  fool,  the  first  time  I did  it,  and  have  to 
go  into  retirement  at  the  second  ? That  means,  I 
am  simply  obliged  to  act  on  my  own  responsibility 
and  interpret  the  spirit  of  war  and  the  wfil  of  the 
authorities  as  best  I can— since  to  ask  about  it 
would  be  either  stupidity  or  audacity.  But  I am 
asking  this  question  now  about  our  position  because 
the  spirit  which  has  been  one  and  the  same  from 
Sargon  and  Assurbanipal  to  William  the  Second 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


5 


appears  suddenly  to  be  in  doubt.  Until  yesterday 
I knew  that  I had  to  train  and  confirm  in  our  troops 
nothing  other  than  just  this  military  spirit — the 
readiness  of  each  soldier  to  kill  his  enemies  and  to  be, 
if  necessary,  killed — and  for  that  it  is  absolutely 
necessary  to  be  perfectly  sure  that  war  is  something 
holy.  Suddenly  the  habitual  confidence  of  the 
officer  loses  its  foundation  and  military  deeds  are 
deprived  of  their  “ moral-religious  sanction,”  to  use 
a learned  phrase. 

Politician.  —That’s  all  fearfully  exaggerated. 
There  has  been  no  radical  change  in  the  accepted 
point  of  view.  Even  formerly,  everyone  always 
knew  that  war  was  evil  and  the  less  of  it  the  better, 
and,  on  the  other  hand,  wise  people  know  now  that 
it  is  a kind  of  evil  which  cannot  yet  be  removed  once 
and  for  all  in  our  time.  The  problem  is  not  the 
complete  abolition  of  war,  but  its  gradual  limitation 
and  isolation  within  certain  narrow  boundaries. 
The  fundamental  notion  about  war  remains  what  it 
has  always  been,  i.e.,  that  it  is  an  inevitable,  evil,  a 
calamity  which  must  be  endured  upon  extreme 
occasions. 

General. — And  only  that  ? 

Politician. — Yes,  that  only. 

General  {jumping  from  his  seat).— -Did  you  ever 
by  any  chance  look  in  the  Saints  ? 

Politician. — You  mean  in  the  Calendar  ? I’ve 
had  to  look  up  names  of  patron  saints,  the  name-days 
of  my  friends  and  relatives. 

General.— And  have  you  remarked  the  sorts  of 
saints  in  the  Calendar  ? 


6 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


Politician.  —There  were  various  sorts. 

General.  — But  of  what  caUing  ? 

Politician.  —And  of  various  callings,  I fancy. 

General. — Well,  that’s  just  it.  They  are  not  so 
very  various. 

Politician. — What  do  you  mean?  You  don’t 
mean  to  say  that  they’re  all  military  men  ? 

General.  —Not  aU  ; but  half  are. 

Politician.  —Oh,  again,  what  exaggeration  ! 

General. — Well,  we  can’t  go  over  them  one  by 
one.  But  I affirm  that  the  saints  of  our  own 
Russian  Church  belong  to  two  classes  only  : they 
are  either  monks  of  various  grades,  or  princes.  And 
to  be  a prince  meant  in  old  time  to  be  a warrior. 
We  have  no  other  saints — of  course,  I am  speaking 
of  men-saints,  they  are  aU  either  monks  or  soldiers. 

Lady.- — But  you’ve  forgotten  our  fanatics. 
General ! ,/ 

General. — I haven’t  forgotten  them  at  aU,  but 
they  were  a sort  of  irregular  monks.  Wffiat  the 
Cossacks  are  to  the  army,  they  were  for  monas- 
ticism.  What’s  more,  if  you  can  find  for  me  among 
the  Russian  saints  one  white  priest,  or  a merchant, 
or  a deacon,  or  a chancellor’s  clerk,  or  a citizen,  or  a 
peasant,  or,  in  one  word,  any  representative  of  any 
profession  other  than  that  of  monk  or  soldier — 3’ou 
can  have  all  I shall  bring  back  from  Monte  Carlo 
next  Sunday. 

Politician. — Thank  you.  You  can  keep  your 
treasure  and  your  half  of  the  saints.  But  tell  me, 
please,  what  did  you  want  to  deduce  from  this  dis- 
covery or  observation  of  j'ours  ? Surely  you  don’t 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


7 


mean  to  argue  that  only  monks  and  soldiers  can  be 
moral  patterns  ? 

General.— You  haven’t  altogether  guessed  my 
meaning.  I have  known  many  virtuous  people 
amongst  the  white  clergy,  amongst  bankers,  amongst 
officials,  and  amongst  peasants.  The  most  virtuous 
being  I can  call  to  mind  is  the  peasant  nurse-girl  of 
one  of  my  friends.  But  we  are  not  speaking  of  that. 
My  point  really  is- — how  could  so  many  soldiers  have 
found  place  side  by  side  with  monks  and  have  been 
given  a preference  to  ordinary  civilians  if  their  pro- 
fession was  a tolerated  evU,  such  as,  for  instance, 
the  liquor  business  or  something  even  worse  ? It  is 
clear  that  the  Christian  nations  who  showed  their 
thoughts  by  the  recognition  of  sainthood  not  only 
respected,  but  even  specially  respected  the  military 
calling,  and  that  of  all  worldly  professions  they 
reckoned  the  military  alone  to  be  the  best  training 
place  for  sanctity.  And  that  point  of  view  is  not 
compatible  with  the  present  movement  to  abolish 
war. 

Politician. — Oh,  have  I said  that  there  has  been 
no  change  ? Undoubtedly  there  has  been  some 
desirable  change  in  point  of  view.  The  religious 
aureole  which  once  surrounded  war  and  warriors  in 
the  eyes  of  the  crowd  has  now  been  taken  away. 
That’s  so.  But  we  had  got  to  that  point  long  since. 
And  whom  does  that  practically  affect  ? The  clergy 
perhaps,  since  the  preparation  of  aureoles  belongs  to 
its  department.  But  the  clergy  have  got  a good  deal 
still  to  get  rid  of.  What  they  cannot  preserve 
literally  they  interpret  in  an  allegorical  sense,  and. 


8 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


for  the  rest,  take  refuge  in  blessed  silence  and  blessed 
forgetfulness. 

Prince. — Yes,  the  blessed  adaptation  to  new  ideas 
has  commenced.  I follow  our  religious  literature 
pretty  closely  for  my  own  publications.  And  I have 
already  had  the  pleasure  of  reading  in  two  journals 
that  Christianity  unconditionally  condemns  war. 

General. — Surely  not. 

Prince.- — ^Yes,  I couldn’t  believe  my  eyes.  But 
I can  show  it  you. 

Politician  {to  General). ‘ — You  see  ! But  why 
should  that  worry  you.  You  are  people  of  deeds, 
not  of  fine  words.  Professional  amour-propre  and 
vanity,  eh  ? That’s  not  a good  state  of  things. 
But  all  the  same,  I repeat,  that  in  practice  all  remains 
as  before.  Though  the  system  of  militarism  w’hich 
has  prevented  us  breathing  these  last  thirty  years 
must  now  disappear,  yet  troops  in  certain  dimensions 
will  remain — as  many  as  are  considered  indispen- 
sable. And  from  them  will  be  demanded  the  same 
military  qualities  as  before. 

General. — Oh,  now  you’re  asking  milk  from  a 
dead  cow.  \\Ъо  wiU  provide  you  with  the  military 
qualities  when  the  primal  inspiration  of  these 
military  qualities  has  been  removed — the  faith  in 
the  holiness  of  the  w'ork  ? And  this  faith  cannot 
remain,  once  it  is  held  that  w^ar  is  an  evil  and  a / 
calamity  only  tolerated  on  extreme  occasions. 

Politician.- — Oh,  w^e  shan’t  ask  military  men  to 
hold  that  opinion.  Let  them  consider  themselves 
the  first  people  in  the  w'orld — whose  business  is  it  ? 
Didn’t  I say  that  Prince  Luzinian  was  permitted  to 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


9 


call  himself  King  of  Cyprus  as  long  as  he  didn’t  ask 
us  to  provide  him  with  money  to  buy  Cyprus  wine  ? 
Don’t  tempt  yourselves  to  our  pockets  more  than 
you  need,  that’s  all.  And  then,  if  you  will,  you  may 
remain  in  your  own  eyes  the  salt  of  the  earth  and 
the  flower  of  mankind  ; who  is  to  prevent  you  ? 

General. — He  says  in  our  own  eyes  ! Are  we 
talking  on  the  moon  ? Are  we  going  to  keep  our 
military  forces  in  a Torricellian  vacuum  to  save  them 
from  outside  influences  ? This  in  the  time  of 
universal  military  service,  with  conscripts  who  have 
only  to  serve  short  terms,  in  the  time  of  cheap  news- 
papers ? No,  the  matter  is  clear  enough.  Once 
military  service  became  obligatory  for  all  and  each, 
and  at  the  same  time  this  negative  attitude  towards 
military  work  became  recognised  throughout  society, 
beginning  with  the  representatives  of  the  State,  as 
you  for  instance,  then  undoubtedly  that  negative 
attitude  must  be  assimilated  by  the  officers  and  the 
soldiers  themselves.  If  people  came  to  look  on 
military  service  as  merely  an  inevitable  evil,  then 
no  one  would  voluntarily  choose  the  military  pro- 
fession as  a life  career,  unless  indeed  it  were  some 
sport  of  Nature  who  could  And  no  other  refuge  ; and 
аП  those  who  against  their  will  are  obliged  to  bear 
arms  for  a while  will  bear  them  in  the  same  spirit  as 
penal  convicts  bear  their  chains.  In  the  face  of 
that,  what  have  you  to  say  about  the  relation  of 
military  qualities  to  the  military  spirit  ? 

Mr.  Z. — I have  always  been  convinced  that,  after 
the  bringing  in  of  universal  military  service,  the 
final  dismissal  of  the  troops  and  the  break-up  of 


ІО 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


separate  States  is  only  a question  of  time,  and  a time 
not  very  far  distant,  considering  the  present  tempo 
of  history. 

General. — Perhaps  you’re  right. 

Prince. — I will  even  affirm  that  you  are  certainly 
right,  though  it  never  came  into  my  head  till  this 
moment.  But  that’s  splendid.  Only  think  of  it : 
militarism  brings  forth  as  its  extreme  expression  the 
system  of  universal  military  service,  and,  thanks 
just  to  that,  there  perish  not  only  the  most  modern 
form  of  militarism,  but  all  the  ancient  foundations 
of  the  military  idea.  Wonderful ! 

Lady. — The  Prince’s  face  has  become  quite  gay. 
That  is  good.  He  had  been  going  about  with  such  a 
gloomy  expression — not  at  all  that  which  becomes 
a “ true  Christian.” 

Prince. — Yes,  we  are  surrounded  already  by  too 
many  sad  things ; one  joy  remains  mine,  however — 
the  knowledge  of  the  inevitable  triumph  of  reason 
over  all  things. 

Mr.  Z.- — There  isn’t  the  slightest  doubt  that 
militarism  in  Europe  and  in  Russia  will  eat  itself  up 
and  die  of  surfeit,  but  what  sort  of  joys  and  triumphs 
will  result  from  that  fact  remains  to  be  seen. 

Prince. — How  ? Do  you  mean  to  say  you  have 
any  doubt  but  that  war  and  the  military  business  is 
anything  but  an  unconditional  and  extreme  e\’il 
from  which  humanity  has  got  to  free  itself  absolutely, 
and  as  soon  as  it  can  ? Do  you  mean  to  say  you 
doubt  that  a complete  and  rapid  disappearance  of 
this  cannibalism  would  not  be,  under  any  circum- 
stances, a triumph  of  reason  and  goodness  ? 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


II 


Mr.  Z. — I am  absolutely  convinced  to  the  con- 
trary. 

Prince. — ^That  is  to  say  ? 

Mr.  Z. — . . that  war  is  not  an  unconditional 
evil,  and  that  peace  is  not  an  unconditional  good,  or, 
speaking  more  simply,  it  is  possible  to  have  a good 
war  ; it  is  also  possible  to  have  a bad  peace. 

Prince. — Oh,  now  I see  the  difference  between 
your  point  of  view  and  that  of  the  General.  He 
thinks  that  war  is  always  good  and  peace  is  always 
bad. 

General. — No,  no.  I understand  perfectly  that 
war  can  be  upon  occasion  a very  bad  affair,  for 
instance,  when  we  are  beaten,  as  at  Narva  or 
Austerlitz ; and  peace  can  be  splendid,  as  for 
instance,  the  peace  of  Nishstadt  or  Kutchuk- 
Kainardzh. 

Lady. — That  seems  to  be  another  variation  of  the 
famous  remark  of  some  Kaffir  or  Hottentot,  who 
told  the  missionary  that  he  understood  the  difference 
between  good  and  evil  quite  well : good  was  when 
he  carried  off  other  people’s  wives  and  cattle,  evil 
was  when  others  carried  off  his. 

General.  — The  African  let  that  fall  accidentally, 
I made  that  humorous  remark  on  purpose.  But 
now  I’d  like  to  hear  how  clever  people  determine  the 
moral  point  of  view  about  war. 

Politician. — Ah,  if  our  “ clever  people  ” would 
only  put  aside  scholasticism  and  metaphysics  when 
they  come  to  such  a clear,  historically  conditioned 
problem. 

Prince. — Clear — from  what  point  of  view  ? 


12 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


Politician. — My  point  of  view  is  the  ordinary 
European  one,  which,  by  the  way,  nowadays,  even 
in  other  parts  of  the  world,  educated  people  are 
beginning  to  assimilate. 

Prince.— And  its  essence  is,  of  course,  that  every- 
thing is  comparative,  and  that  an  unconditional 
difference  between  ought  and  ought  not,  between  good 
and  bad,  must  never  be  allowed.  Isn’t  that  it  ? 

Mr.  Z.  — Beg  pardon  ; this  point  of  dispute  is 
surely  futile.  I,  for  instance,  whole-heartedly 
acknowledge  an  irreconcilable  opposition  between 
moral  good  and  evU,  but,  even  holding  that  opinion, 
it  is  still  quite  clear  to  me  that  war  and  peace  cannot 
be  checked  off  in  that  way,  and  that  it  wmuld  be 
impossible  to  say  that  war  was  all  black  and  peace 
w-as  all  white. 

Prince. — But  you  are  making  a contradiction  in 
terms.  If  something  which  is  in  itself  evU,  as  for 
instance,  murder,  can  under  certain  circumstances 
be  good,  when,  for  instance,  you  choose  to  caU  it  war, 
then  where  will  you  put  your  unconditional  dis- 
tinction between  good  and  еѵП  ? 

Mr.  Z. — How  simple  it  is  for  you.  Every  murder 
is  an  unconditional  evU,  war  is  murder  ; therefore 
war  is  an  unconditional  еѵП.  A syllogism  of  the 
first  order.  But  you  have  forgotten  that  both  the 
larger  and  the  smaller  premisses  have  yet  to  be 
demonstrated,  so  consequently  your  conclusion  still 
hangs  in  the  air. 

Politician.— Didn’t  I say  that  we  should  drop 
into  scholasticism  ? 

Lady. — Yes.  What  are  they  talking  about  ? 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


13 


Politician. — About  the  larger  and  the  smaller 
premiss. 

Mr.  Z. — Forgive  me.  We  shall  get  to  business  in 
a moment.  So  you  affirm  that  on  any  occasion  to 
take  away  another  person’s  life  is  unconditional  evil  ? 

Prince. — Without  doubt. 

Mr.  Z. — And  to  be  killed — is  that  an  uncondi- 
tional evil,  or  not  ? 

Prince.  — According  to  the  Hottentots,  the 
answer  is  yes,  but  we  were  speaking  about  moral 
evil,  and  that  can  consist  only  in  the  personal 
actions  of  a reasoning  being,  it  cannot  consist  in 
what  happens  to  a being  against  his  will.  That 
means,  to  be  killed — just  as  to  die  from  cholera  or 
influenza— not  only  is  not  an  unconditional  evil,  but 
even  is  not  evil.  Socrates  and  the  Stoics  taught  us 
that  in  their  day. 

Mr.  Z. — Well,  for  people  of  such  antiquity  I will 
not  take  it  upon  myself  to  answer.  But  your  idea 
of  unconditional  evil  goes  a bit  lame  when  we  take 
into  consideration  the  moral  significance  of  a murder. 
According  to  you  it  works  out  that  an  unconditional 
evil  consists  in  causing  to  another  something  which 
in  itself  is  not  even  evil.  As  you  will,  but  the  theory 
limps  a little  there.  However,  we  will  dismiss  this 
question  of  limping,  lest  through  it  we  should  really 
climb  into  an  academic  discussion.  The  point  is  that 
the  evil  of  murder  consists  not  in  the  physical  fact 
of  the  deprivation  of  life,  but  in  the  moral  reason  of 
that  fact,  that  is,  in  the  evil  will  of  the  murderer. 
You  agree  ? 

Prince. — Of  course.  Without  that  evil  will  there 


ч 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


is  no  murder.  There  is  only  misfortune  or  careless- 
ness. 

Mr.  Z. — It  is  quite  clear  when  the  wiU  to  kUl  is 
completely  absent,  as  for  instance  in  the  case  of  an 
unsuccessful  surgical  operation.  But  it  is  possible  to 
imagine  a different  situation,  when  the  w^ih,  although 
it  has  not  the  direct  aim  of  taking  away  the  life  of  a 
man,  has  yet  agreed  to  that  idea  as  possible  upon  an 
extreme  occasion.  Would  a murder  resulting  from 
such  a state  of  will  be,  from  your  point  of  view, 
unconditionally  evil  ? 

Prince.— Yes,  of  course,  once  the  will  agrees  to 
murder. 

Mr.  Z. — But  surely  it  happens  that  a wiU,  though 
agreeing  to  the  idea  of  murder,  is  stUl  not  an  evil 
will,  and  that  consequently,  murder  cannot  be  an 
unconditional  evil,  even  from  the  subjective  side. 

Prince. — That’s  quite  incomprehensible.  . . . 
However,  I guess  what  you’re  after.  You  mean  the 
famous  instance  when  in  a w'ild  district  a father  is 
face  to  face  with  an  engaged  scoundrel  лѵЬо  is  about 
to  fling  himself  on  his  innocent  (for  greater  effect  add 
the  word  little)  daughter,  and  the  father  being  unable 
to  protect  her  otherwise,  slays  the  would-be  ravisher. 
I’ve  heard  the  argument  a thousand  times. 

Mr.  Z. — The  remarkable  thing,  however,  is  not 
that  you  have  heard  it  a thousand  times,  but  that 
no  one  has  ever  heard  from  those  who  think  like 
you  even  a fair-seeming  objection  to  the  argument. 

Prince. — But  w'hat  is  there  to  answer  ? 

Mr.  Z. — There,  there.  Well,  if  you  do  not  wish 
to  answer  in  the  form  of  an  objection,  then  state  a 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


15 


direct  and  positive  case  to  the  effect  that  on  all 
occasions  without  exception,  and  consequently  in 
this  of  which  we  are  speaking,  to  abstain  from 
material  opposition  of  evil  is  better  than  to  employ 
force  with  the  risk  of  killing  an  еѵЦ  and  dangerous 
man. 

Prince. — What  sort  of  generalisation  can  there 
be  for  a unique  case  ? Once  you  have  agreed  that 
murder  in  general  is  in  the  moral  sense  evil,  then  it 
is  clear  that  in  every  single  instance  it  will  be  evil 
also. 

Lady.- — Oh,  but  that’s  weak. 

Mr.  Z. — It  is  even  very  weak.  Prince.  That  it  is 
generally  better  not  to  kill  than  to  kill,  we  are  all 
agreed,  and  there  is  no  argument  about  it.  The 
question  is  about  separate  occasions.  It  is  asked  ; 
Is  the  general  or  generally  accepted  rule  not  to  kill 
really  an  absolute  rule  permitting  no  exceptions 
whatever,  neither  upon  a unique  occasion  nor  under 
any  circumstances  whatsoever,  or  does  it  permit, 
be  it  even  one  exception,  and  become  therefore  a 
rule  which  is  not  absolute,  not  unconditional  ? 

Prince.' — No,  I don’t  agree  to  such  a formal  state- 
ment of  the  question.  To  what  end  ? If  I admit 
that  in  your  exceptional  example  specially  thought 
out  for  argument  . . . 

Lady  [reproachfully) . —Dear,  dear  ! 

General  [ironically). — Oh-ho-ho  ! 

Prince  [paying  no  attention)  that  in 

your  speciaUy-thought-out  instance  to  kill  is  better 
than  not  to  kill — as  a matter  of  fact  I,  of  course,  do 
not  admit  such  a thing,  but  supposing  you  are  right. 


іб 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


supposing  also  that  your  instance  is  not  one  specially 
thought  out  for  argument  but  is  something  which  is 
real,  though,  as  you  would  agree,  most  rare  and 
exceptional.  We  are  talking  of  war,  are  we  not  ? 
A general  and  universal  phenomenon.  And  you  will 
not  dare  to  affirm  that  Napoleon  or  Moltke  or 
Skobelef  were  to  be  found  in  any  position  in  the 
remotest  degree  resembling  that  of  a father  obliged 
to  protect  his  daughter  from  a savage. 

Lady. — Ah,  that’s  better.  Bravo,  mon  Prince  ! 

Mr.  Z. — Certainly.  A clever  extrication  from  an 
unpleasant  question.  But  allow  me,  however,  to 
state  the  logical  and  historical  link  between  the  two 
phenomena,  murder  and  war.  For  that  purpose  let 
us  take  up  our  example  without,  however,  those  par- 
ticulars which  seem  to  strengthen  it,  but  which,  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  really  weaken  its  significance.  The 
fact  that  he  who  murdered  was  a father  and  she 
whom  he  protected  was  his  daughter  is  not  necessary 
to  us,  in  that  the  question  loses  its  ethical  significance 
in  the  domain  of  natural  moral  feelings  : parental 
love  would,  of  course,  force  the  father  to  strike  the 
evil-doer  without  waiting  to  decide  the  question  had 
he  or  had  he  not  the  right  to  do  it  from  the  highest 
moral  standpoint.  So  let  us  abandon  the  father  and 
take  a childless  moralist  before  whose  eyes  some 
weak  fellow-creature,  altogether  unknown  to  him, 
is  suddenly  subjected  to  the  furious  assault  of  a wild 
miscreant.  According  to  you,  this  moralist  should 
fold  his  arms  and  preach  virtue  whilst  the  monster  is 
tearing  his  victim  ; is  that  not  it  ? According  to 
you,  this  moralist  would  not  feel  in  himself  any  moral 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


17 


impulse  to  stop  the  monster  by  material  force  with 
the  possibility  and  even  probability  of  killing.  And 
if  the  crime  is  committed  to  the  accompaniment  of 
his  fine  words,  do  you  mean  to  say  that  his  con- 
science will  not  reproach  him,  and  that  he  will  not  be 
ashamed  of  himself  and  disgusted  with  himself  ? 

Prince. — It  is  possible  that  a moralist  who  did 
not  believe  in  the  reality  of  moral  order,  or  who 
forgot  that  God  was  not  in  violence  but  in  truth, 
might  feel  so. 

Lady. — Ah,  that’s  very  well  said.  Now  you 
answer  something. 

Mr.  Z. — I answer  that  I should  have  liked  it  to  be 
said  still  better,  more  directly  and  more  simply.  I 
suppose  you  wished  to  say  that  a moralist  who 
actually  believed  in  God’s  truth  should  have  turned 
to  God  with  prayer  that  the  evil  deed  be  not  com- 
mitted, or  asking  for  a moral  miracle,  the  sudden 
turning  of  the  evil-doer  to  the  way  of  truth,  or  asking 
for  a material  miracle,  the  sudden  paralysis  of  the 
man  . . . 

Lady. — It  could  be  done  without  paralysis.  The 
murderer  might  take  fright  at  something  or  be  in 
some  other  way  diverted  from  his  evil  intention. 

Mr.  Z. — That’s  all  the  same,  because  the  miracle 
is  not  in  the  actual  happening,  but  in  the  expediency 
of  the  happening,  be  it  in  physical  paralysis  or  in 
some  sort  of  mental  agitation.  In  any  case,  the 
Prince’s  means  of  preventing  evil-doing  lies  either  in 
prayer  or  in  miracle. 

Prince. — What  do  you  mean  ? Why  prayer, 
why  miracle  ? 

w.c. 


c 


i8 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


Mr.  Z. — If  not,  what  then  ? 

Prince. — Once  I believe  that  the  world  is 
governed  on  good  and  reasonable  principles  I believe 
nothing  that  is  contrary  to  the  will  of  God  can 
happen. 

Mr.  Z. — Beg  pardon  ! How  old  are  you  ? 

Prince. — What  do  you  mean  by  that  ques- 
tion ? 

Mr.  Z. — Nothing  offensive,  I assure  you.  Thirty  ? 

Prince. — Over  thirty. 

Mr.  Z. — Then  you  certainly  must  have  seen,  or,  if 
you  have  not  seen,  must  have  heard,  or,  if  you  have 
not  heard,  must  have  read  in  the  newspapers,  that 
evil  and  immoral  deeds  do,  however,  take  place  upon 
this  world. 

Prince. — Well  ? 

Mr.  Z.— Well,  that  means  that  moral  order  or 
truth  or  the  will  of  God  is  not  absolutely  realised 
upon  the  world  . . . 

Politician. — At  last  to  business.  If  e\dl  exists, 
then  the  gods  either  cannot  or  do  not  wish  to  prevent 
it.  Gods  in  the  sense  of  all-powerful  or  blessed 
forces  do  not  exist.  Old,  but  true. 

Lady. — Oh,  you  ! 

General. — We  have  talked  ourselves  to  that 
point.  Philosophise  and  your  head  goes  round. 

Prince. — But  that’s  bad  philosophy  ! As  if  God’s 
will  were  connected  with  our  vague  conceptions  of 
good  and  evil. 

Mr.  Z. — Yhth  certain  vague  conceptions  it  is  not 
connected,  but  with  the  true  understanding  of  good 
it  is  connected  in  the  closest  way.  Otherwise,  if 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


19 


good  and  evil  are  indifferent  to  the  Godhead,  you 
have  refuted  your  own  argument,  Prince. 

Prince.^ — How  is  that  ? 

Mr.  Z. — Because  if  it’s  all  the  same  for  the  God- 
head whether  a savage  under  the  influence  of  brutal 
passion  destroys  a weak  and  delicate  being,  then 
long  since  the  Godhead  must  have  found  nothing 
objectionable  in  the  man  who,  under  the  influence 
of  compassion,  destroys  the  savage.  You  will  cer- 
tainly not  set  yourself  to  defend  anything  so  absurd 
as  that  the  murder  of  a weak  and  innocent  being  is 
not  evil  before  God,  but  that  the  murder  of  a strong 
and  evil  one  is. 

Prince. — That  seems  to  you  absurd  because  you 
lay  the  emphasis  in  the  wrong  place.  What  is 
morally  important  is  not  who  is  killed,  but  who  kills. 
You  yourself  called  the  evil-doer  a savage,  that  is,  a 
being  without  conscience  or  reason  ; and  how  could 
there  be  moral  evil,  therefore,  in  his  actions  ? 

Lady. — Oh,  oh  ! What  question  is  there  of  a 
savage  in  the  literal  sense  ? It’s  all  the  same  as  if 
I said  to  my  daughter,  “ What  stupidities  you  are 
saying,  my  angel ! ” and  you  began  to  take  me  to 
task  and  say  “ Can  angels  say  stupidities  ? ” What 
a poor  argument  this  is  ! 

Prince. — Excuse  me.  I know,  of  course,  that  the 
savage  is  also  a man,  but  all  the  same,  it  is  not 
possible  that  a man  with  reason  and  conscience 
should  commit  such  a crime. 

Mr.  Z. — Of  course  a man  acting  like  a beast  loses 
reason  and  conscience  in  the  sense  that  he  ceases  to 
listen  to  their  voice,  but  that  the  man  is  without 


20 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


reason  or  conscience  altogether  remains  to  be  shown, 
and  meanwhile  I shall  continue  of  opinion  that  the 
brutal  man  is  distinguished  from  us,  not  by  the 
absence  of  reason  and  conscience,  but  only  by  his 
own  determination  to  act  contrary  to  them  at  the 
enticement  of  the  beast  in  himself,  but  the  beast  is 
in  us  also,  only  we  commonly  keep  him  in  durance. 
The  man  of  whom  we  are  speaking  had  loosed  the 
beast  from  his  fetters ; but  fetters  were  there 
though  not  being  used.  In  general,  that’s  it,  and  if 
the  Prince  doesn’t  agree  with  you  quickly,  hoist  him 
with  his  own  petard.  If  the  evil-doer  were  only  a 
beast,  one  absolutely  without  reason  or  conscience, 
then  to  kill  him  would  be  all  the  same  as  to  kill  a 
wolf  or  a tiger  who  had  been  attacking  a man — even 
the  society  for  the  protection  of  animals  does  not 
forbid  that. 

Prince. — But  you  again  forget  that  whatever  the 
state  of  that  man’s  mind,  whether  reason  and 
conscience  were  in  complete  atrophy  or  whether  he 
acted  with  conscious  immorality,  the  question  is  not 
about  him,  but  about  you  yourselves  : your  reason 
and  conscience  are  not  atrophied,  and  therefore  you 
would  not  consciously  disregard  what  they  demand 
of  you — you  would  not  have  kiUed  that  man,  what- 
ever sort  of  man  he  were. 

Mr.  Z. — Of  course  I shouldn’t  have  killed  him  if 
reason  and  conscience  had  unconditional!}^  for- 
bidden it.  But  put  it  to  yourself  that  my  reason 
and  conscience  advise  me  to  act  another  way,  and 
that  way  seems  to  me  more  reasonable  and  con- 
scientious. 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


21 


Prince. — Let  us  hear  an  example.  It  would  be 
curious. 

Mr.  Z. — And  first  of  all  let  us  admit  that  reason 
and  conscience  can  count  at  least  to  three  . . . 

General.  — Oh-ho  ; oh-ho  ! 

Mr.  Z.- — And  therefore  reason  and  conscience, 
since  they  do  not  wish  to  give  false  verdicts, 
will  not  say  to  me  two,  when  the  answer  is 
three. 

General  {impatiently).-— Tz-s  ! 

Prince. — ^This  is  all  beyond  me  ! 

Mr.  Z. — Well,  according  to  you,  reason  and  con- 
science teU  me  only  about  myself  and  about  the 
evil-doer,  but  the  whole  matter,  according  to  you, 
is  in  that  I do  not  lay  a finger  upon  him.  But  we 
must  not  forget  the  third  person,  and  he  appears  to 
me  to  be  the  most  important,  the  victim  of  the 
outrage,  the  man  demanding  my  support.  You 
always  forget  about  him,  but  conscience  speaks  of 
him,  and  speaks,  I think,  first  of  all.  The  will  of 
God  is  that  I save  this  victim,  according  to  possi- 
bility, sparing  the  evil-doer,  but  in  any  case,  I must 
give  the  help  which  is  in  my  power  ; admonition  if 
that  will  do,  if  not,  then  material  force,  and  only  in 
the  event  of  my  arms  being  tied  need  I turn  to  the 
last  means,  seeking  aid  from  above  by  prayer,  that 
is,  by  the  highest  exercise  of  good-will,  whence  as 
a matter  of  fact  I am  convinced  a miracle  would 
derive  when  necessary.  But  which  of  these  means 
of  giving  help  to  the  victim  it  is  necessary  to  employ 
depends  on  the  spiritual  and  phenomenal  conditions 
of  the  event.  There  is  only  one  unconditional  thing 


22 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


here,  and  that  is,  that  I help  him  who  is  suhering  ; 
that  is  what  my  conscience  says. 

General.' — Hurrah  ! The  centre  is  broken. 

Prince. — I do  not  look  so  widely.  My  conscience 
in  such  a case  is  more  definite,  and  expresses  itself 
more  shortly  : Thou  shalt  not  kill — that  is  the 
whole  answer.  Moreover,  I do  not  see  that  we  have 
yet  advanced  an  iota  in  this  argument.  If  I again 
agreed  with  you,  that  in  the  position  which  you 
imagine,  any  man,  even  one  morally  developed  and 
deeply  conscientious,  could  under  the  influence  of 
sympathy,  not  having  time  to  obtain  mentally  a 
clear  notion  of  the  moral  quality  of  his  act,  commit 
a murder,  what  follows  with  regard  to  the  funda- 
mental issue  ? Are  we  to  suppose  that  Tamerlane 
or  Alexander  of  Macedon  or  Lord  Kitchener  killed 
or  forced  others  to  kill  for  the  protection  of  weak 
and  delicate  beings  who  were  in  danger  of  assault  at 
the  hand  of  evil-doers  ? 

Mr.  Z. — This  juxtaposition  of  Tamerlane  and 
Alexander  of  Macedon  promises  poorly  for  our  his- 
torical sense,  but  since  you,  for  the  second  time,  turn 
impatiently  to  this  general  domain  of  acti\dty,  then 
permit  me  to  quote  an  historical  event  which  may 
help  us  to  connect  the  question  of  personal  protection 
with  the  question  of  governmental  protection.  It 
was  in  the  twelfth  century  at  Kiev.  The  appanaged 
princes  were  even  then  apparently  of  your  opinion 
with  regard  to  war,  and  holding  that  quarrelling 
and  fighting  should  be  confined  to  home,  they  would 
not  agree  to  go  out  to  fight  the  Poloftsi,  saying  that 
they  would  be  sorry  to  cause  people  the  calamity 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


23 


of  war.  To  that  the  Grand  Duke  Vladimir  Mono- 
makh  made  the  following  reply  : “You  are  sorry  for 
these  rascals,  but  you  forget  that  Spring  is  coming. 
. . . The  peasant  will  go  out  with  his  horse  to  plough . 
The  Poloftsi  will  come,  kill  the  peasant,  and  lead 
off  his  horse  ; they  will  come  in  great  numbers, 
massacre  all  the  peasants,  carry  off  all  the  women 
and  children,  drive  off  the  cattle  and  burn  the  village. 
Aren’t  you  sorry  for  these  people  ? I am  sorry  for 
them,  and  for  that  reason  call  you  against  the 
Poloftsi.’’  On  that  occasion  the  princes  were  put 
to  shame,  and  the  land  had  protection  under  the 
rule  of  Vladimir.  But  they  afterwards  returned  to 
their  peace-loving  state,  avoided  exterior  wars,  and 
quarrelled  at  home  and  made  scandals,  and  it  ended 
for  Russia  with  the  advance  of  the  Mongol  hordes, 
and  for  the  actual  descendants  of  these  princes,  it 
ended  with  the  kind  of  entertainment  which  history 
brought  them  in  the  shape  of  Ivan  IV. 

Prince. — This  is  all  beyond  me.  You  cite  an 
event  which  never  occurred  to  any  of  us,  and  cer- 
tainly never  will  occur,  and  call  up  some  Vladimir 
Monomakh,  who  perhaps  never  existed  at  all,  and 
with  whom,  in  any  case,  we  have  nothing  whatever 
to  do  . . . 

Lady. — Parlez  pour  vous,  monsieur. 

Mr.  Z. — Why,  you.  Prince,  are  one  of  those  who 
came  to  us  with  Rurik. 

Prince. — They  say  so,  but  what  interest  to  me, 
do  you  think,  are  Rurik,  Sinius,  and  Truvor  ? 

Lady. — I think  that  not  to  know  about  one’s 
own  forefathers  is  to  be  like  children  who  think 


24 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


they  were  found  in  a kitchen  garden  and  beneath  a 
cabbage. 

Prince. — And  what  about  those  unfortunates 
who  don’t  happen  to  have  any  forefathers  ? 

Mr.  Z. — Every  one  has  at  his  disposal  very  cir- 
cumstantial and  instructive  memoirs  left  him  by  his 
forefathers — I mean,  national  and  universal  history. 

Prince.— But  these  memoirs  cannot  determine 
for  us  the  question  what  are  we  to  be  now,  what  ought 
we  to  do  now.  Admit  that  Vladimir  Monomakh  did 
exist,  and  was  not  simply  the  imagination  of  some 
monk  ; admit  even  that  he  was  an  excellent  man 
and  was  sincerely  sorry  for  the  peasants,  in  any  case 
he  was  right  to  fight  with  the  Poloftsi,  because  in 
those  wild  times  moral  conscience  had  not  triumphed 
over  the  coarse  Byzantine  understanding  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  it  did  permit  people  to  kill  those  whom 
they  deemed  evil-doers  ; but  how  can  we  act  so,  once 
that  we  have  understood  that  murder  is  an  evil, 
something  contrary  to  the  will  of  God,  forbidden  from 
of  old  by  God’s  commandment,  when  we  know  that 
it  cannot  be  permitted  us  under  any  guise,  under  any 
name,  and  cannot  cease  to  be  evil  when  instead  of 
being  the  killing  of  one  it  becomes  the  killing  of 
thousands  under  the  name  of  war  ? It  is  first  of  all 
a question  of  personal  conscience. 

General. — Well,  if  it  is  a matter  of  personal  con- 
science, permit  me  to  make  the  following  personal 
report.  I am  a man  who  in  the  moral  sense,  as  of 
course  in  most  other  senses,  am  altogether  mediocre 
— neither  black  nor  white,  but  grey.  I have  not 
evinced  either  special  virtue  or  special  sin.  But  in 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


25 


all  good  acts  there  is  always  a difficulty  in  weighing 
their  merit ; you  can  never  be  sure  whether  your 
conscience  had  been  obeyed,  whether  your  con- 
science stands  for  real  good  or  only  for  a kind  of 
mental  softness,  a habit  of  life,  or  an  impulse  of 
vanity.  Good  acts  always  seem  to  be  in  a small  way. 
In  the  whole  of  my  life  I only  remember  one  good 
occasion  which  it  would  be  impossible  to  name 
small,  but  I know  absolutely  that  then  there  was 
no  doubt  whatever  about  my  impulse  ; I acted 
solely  at  the  dictates  of  a good  power.  It  was  the 
one  occasion  in  life  when  I experienced  a complete 
moral  satisfaction,  where  I fell  even  into  a sort  of 
ecstasy  because  I had  acted  without  reflection  or 
hesitation.  My  act  remains  till  now,  and  will  of 
course  remain  for  ever,  my  purest  memory.  Well, 
and  that  one  good  act  of  mine  was  a murder,  and 
not  by  any  means  a small  murder,  for  in  a quarter  of 
an  hour  I killed  considerably  more  than  a thousand 
men. 

Lady. — Quelles  blagues ! And  I thought  that 
you  were — serious. 

General. — Altogether  serious  ; I could  bring 
witnesses.  Certainly  I did  not  kill  with  my  hands, 
with  these  sinful  hands,  but  with  the  aid  of  six  pure, 
sinless,  steel  cannon,  with  the  most  virtuous  and 
beneficial  shrapnel. 

Lady. — What  good  was  there  in  that  ? 

General. — Well,  of  course,  although  I am  a 
military  man,  and,  even  according  to  our  present 
style,  a militarist,  I should  not  call  the  simple 
destruction  of  a few  thousands  of  ordinary  people 


2б 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


something  good,  be  they  Germans  or  Hungarians  or 
Englishmen  or  Turks.  This  was  something  quite 
special.  I cannot  even  now  speak  about  it  with 
equanimity.  It  stirred  up  my  soul  so  much. 

Lady. — Well,  tell  us  it  quickly. 

General. — Since  I mentioned  the  cannon,  you  no 
doubt  guess  that  it  was  in  the  last  Turkish  war.  I 
was  in  the  Third  Caucasian  Army.  After  the  third 
of  October  . . . 

Lady. — What  third  of  October  ? 

General. — That  was  when  the  fight  on  the 
heights  of  Aladzhin  took  place,  when  we  for  the  first 
time  broke  up  the  flanks  of  the  “ invincible  ” Gazi- 
Mukhtar  Pasha.  . . . Well,  after  the  third  of 
October  we  began  our  advance.  I was  commander 
of  the  advance  reconnoitring  division  ; I had  the 
Nizhni  Novgorod  dragoons,  three  hundred  Kubantsi 
and  a battery  of  horse  artillery.  It  was  a dreary 
country,  not  bad  up  in  the  mountains,  beautiful,  but 
in  the  hollows  nothing  but  empty,  burnt-down 
villages  and  trampled  earth.  On  the  twenty-eighth 
of  October  we  descended  to  a valley  where,  by  the 
map,  there  should  have  been  a large  Armenian 
village.  Of  course,  there  was  no  milage  left  what- 
ever, but  there  had  been  a fairly  large  one,  and  not 
long  ago.  The  smoke  of  it  was  seen  for  many  versts. 
I concentrated  my  detachment  because,  according 
to  rumour,  there  was  a powerful  band  of  cavalry 
with  whom  we  might  quite  possibly  come  into 
collision.  I rode  with  the  dragoons,  the  Cossacks 
going  ahead.  Quite  close  to  the  village  the  road  had 
a sharp  turn.  The  Cossacks  galloped  round  and 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


27 


then  came  to  a full  stop,  as  if  rooted  to  the  earth. 
I galloped  up  to  them,  but  before  I saw  with  my  own 
eyes  I guessed  from  the  smell  what  was  the  matter. 
The  Bashi-Bazouks  had  left  their  kitchen  behind. 
An  immense  waggon  of  fugitive  Armenians  had  been 
overtaken  by  the  ravaging  enemy.  The  Bashi- 
Bazouks  had  made  a fire  under  the  waggon  and 
burnt  the  people  slowly  to  death.  Before  doing  so 
they  had  bound  many  of  the  victims  so  that  they 
should  not  escape,  and  had  committed  barbarous 
assaults  upon  them,  there  being  many  women  with 
mutilated  breasts  and  bodies.  I could  not  mention 
all  the  details.  One  picture  is  clear  in  my  eyes  at 
this  moment — a woman  lying  on  her  back  on  the 
ground,  her  neck  and  shoulders  tied  to  the  cart- 
wheel in  such  a way  that  she  could  not  turn  her  head, 
and  she  lay  there  neither  burnt  nor  broken,  but  with 
a ghastly  twisted  expression  on  her  face — she  had 
evidently  died  from  terror.  In  front  of  her  was  a 
high  pole  stuck  into  the  ground,  and  a naked  baby 
was  tied  to  it — probably  her  own  son — all  black  with 
fire  and  its  eyes  protruding.  Such  a mortal  sorrow 
overcame  me  that  I looked  upon  God’s  earth  with 
loathing  and  I acted  as  if  I had  been  a machine.  I 
gave  the  order  for  advance,  and  we  came  up  to  the 
ravaged  village.  It  was  literally  razed  from  the  earth ; 
there  was  not  one  stone  left  upon  another.  Suddenly 
we  saw  what  seemed  like  a scarecrow  emerging  from 
a dry  well  ...  all  muddy  and  torn,  he  came  up  to 
us,  fell  flat  on  the  ground,  and  began  reciting  some- 
thing in  Armenian.  We  made  him  get  up,  cross- 
questioned  him,  and  found  out  that  he  was  an 


28 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


Armenian  from  another  village.  He  was  a little, 
intelligent  fellow  ; he  had  just  arrived  at  this  village 
when  the  inhabitants  were  beginning  to  flee.  The 
fugitives  had  only  just  started  on  their  way  when  the 
Bashi-Bazouks  overtook  them,  a multitude  of  them 
— forty  thousand,  he  said,  but  of  course  he  didn’t 
count  them  on  an  abacus.  He  concealed  himself  in 
a well.  He  heard  the  cries  and  so  knew  what  was 
happening.  Then  he  heard  the  Bashi-Bazouks  turn 
about  and  gallop  off.  “ They  have  probably  gone 
to  our  village  to  do  the  same  with  our  folk,”  said  he. 

When  I heard  that  it  was  as  if  a light  had  suddenly 
shone  in  my  soul.  My  heart  melted,  and  God’s 
world  again  smiled  before  me.  ” Have  they  long 
gone  ? ” I said  to  the  Armenian.  He  reckoned — 
three  hours. 

” And  is  it  far  to  your  village  for  rhounted  men  ? ” 
” About  five  hours.” 

Well,  we  couldn’t  make  up  three  hours’  difference 
in  so  short  a space,  that  was  certain.  ” Oh,  Lord  ! ” 
said  I,  ” isn’t  there  another  road,  a shorter  one  ? ” 

“ There  is,  there  is  ! There’s  a road  through  the 
gorge;  quite  a short  one.  Very  few  people  know  it.” 
‘‘  Possible  for  cavalry  ? ” 

” Yes.” 

” And  for  artillery  ? ” 

” It  would  be  possible,  but  difiicult.” 

We  gave  the  Armenian  a horse,  and  with  the 
whole  detachment  followed  him  through  the  gorge. 
How  we  climbed  among  the  mountains  I hardly 
remember.  Once  more  I felt  like  a machine,  though 
there  was  in  my  soul  a lightness  as  if  I lay  on  feathers. 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


29 


I had  complete  assurance.  I knew  what  was  neces- 
sary to  do,  and  I felt  what  would  be  done. 

We  were  just  issuing  from  the  last  neck  of  the 
gorge  when  suddenly  our  Armenian  gallops  back, 
waving  his  arms  and  crying,  “ There  they  are  ; 
there  they  are  ! ” I went  ahead  to  a point  where 
they  were  visible,  and  distinguished  them  with  my 
glasses,  a great  stretch  of  cavalry,  perhaps  not  forty 
thousand,  but  certainly  three  or  four  if  not  five 
thousand.  The  devils  saw  our  Cossacks  and  turned 
towards  us  as  our  left  flank  issued  from  the  gorge. 
And  they  began  to  fire  on  us.  A gun  in  the  hand  of 
an  Asiatic  monster  is  pretty  well  as  deadly  as  in  the 
hands  of  ordinary  people.  We  began  to  fall ; here 
and  there  a Cossack  rolled  over.  The  eldest  of  our 
centurions  came  up  to  me  and  said  : 

“ Order  us  to  attack,  your  Excellency ! Other- 
wise anathema  will  fall  upon  us  before  we  get  the 
artillery  into  position.  Let  us  sweep  them  away  ! 

“ Be  patient,  darlings,  just  for  a little,”  said  I, 
” I know  you  can  scatter  them,  but  what  sweetness 
is  there  in  that  ? God  orders  me  to  make  an  end  of 
them,  not  to  scatter  them.” 

Well,  I ordered  an  advance  of  part  of  our  men  in 
open  formation,  and  they  engaged  the  enemy, 
exchanging  some  volleys  with  them.  We  kept  a 
hundred  of  the  men  back  to  mask  the  artillery,  and 
placed  the  Nizhni  Novgorods  in  the  recesses  to  the 
left  of  the  battery,  I myself  trembled  all  the  while 
with  impatience.  The  face  of  that  burnt  child  with 
the  protruding  eyes  was  constantly  before  me,  and 
our  Cossacks  kept  falling.  Oh,  Lord  ! 


30 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


Lady. — How  did  it  end  ? 

General.' — It  ended  in  the  best  way  possible. 
The  Cossacks  began  to  retreat,  crying  their  Cossack 
cries  the  while.  The  devil’s  brood  came  after  them, 
they  had  got  excited  and  had  already  ceased  shooting. 
The  whole  crowd  came  galloping  at  us.  The  Cos- 
sacks rode  up  to  within  two  hundred  sazhens  of  us 
and  then  scattered,  all  in  different  directions.  I 
saw  that  the  hour  of  God’s  W'ill  had  arrived.  I 
ordered  the  dispersal  of  the  hundred  masking  the 
battery.  “ All  is  in  order ; God  give  us  His  blessing  ! ” 
said  I to  myself,  and  I gave  the  wurd  to  the  artilleiyL 

And  God  blessed  all  m}^  six  cannon.  The  first 
round  put  them  in  confusion,  the  wLole  horde  turned 
to  flight,  and  after  the  third  round  such  a disorder 
arose  as  W’ould  take  place  on  an  ant-heap  if  you  threw 
several  lighted  matches  upon  it.  They  went  off  with 
a rush  in  all  directions,  in  many  cases  trampling  one 
another  down.  Then  our  Cossacks  and  dragoons  of 
the  left  flank  went  after  them  and  cut  them  up  like 
cabbage.  Those  wLo  escaped  the  artihery  perished 
on  their  swurds.  klany  threw'  down  their  arms, 
leapt  from  their  saddles,  and  offered  themselves  as 
hostages.  But  I did  not  interfere  ; they  themselves 
knew  that  this  was  not  a matter  of  taking  hostages, 
and  our  Cossacks  and  Nizhni  Novgorods  cut  them 
all  up. 

And  if  only  these  brainless  devils  had  not  taken 
fright  at  our  fire,  and  instead  of  running  away  when 
they  were  between  tw'enty  and  thirty  sazhens  from 
us  had  flung  themselves  upon  us  and  taken  the 
cannon,  w'e  had  never  given  them  a third  round. 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


31 


Well,  God  was  with  us  ! The  business  was  done, 
and  it  was  Easter-day  in  my  soul,  the  bright  day 
of  the  resurrection  of  Christ.  We  gathered  our 
dead,  thirty-seven  men  who  had  given  their  souls 
to  God.  We  placed  them  on  a level  stretch  of  land 
in  several  rows,  and  closed  their  eyes.  There  was 
among  us  in  the  third  hundred  an  old  policeman, 
Odarchenko,  a well-read  man  of  remarkable  capacity. 
In  England  he  would  have  become  Prime  Minister. 
Now  he’s  in  Siberia  for  personal  opposition  to  the 
authorities  when  they  were  closing  some  monastery 
of  the  Old  Believers  and  destroying  the  grave  of  a 
much  venerated  elder  of  the  sect.  I called  him  ; 

“ Now,  Odarchenko,”  said  I,  " this  is  a matter  of 
the  road,  and  no  place  for  deciding  the  right  alle- 
luias ; be  our  priest  and  sing  the  requiem  for  our 
dead.”  Eor  him  that  was  a pleasure  of  the  first  order. 

” I shall  be  glad  to  try,  your  Excellency,”  says 
he,  his  face  all  shining.  We  also  found  our  singers 
for  the  service.  We  sang  the  departing  souls  away 
with  full  rites.  It  was  impossible  to  get  priestly 
permission  to  do  such  a thing,  but  it  was  not  neces- 
sary : what  permitted  us  was  the  word  of  Christ  for 
those  who  lay  down  their  life  for  their  friends. 
That’s  how  that  funeral  service  strikes  me  now. 
The  day  had  been  a cloudy  autumn  one,  but  before 
sunset  the  heavy  clouds  disappeared.  The  gorge  was 
black  beneath  us,  but  in  the  sky  the  light  cloudlets 
were  of  many  colours,  as  if  the  regiments  of  God 
were  gathering.  The  bright  festival  in  my  soul 
remained.  A sort  of  calm  and  incomprehensible 
happiness  possessed  me,  as  if  all  earthly  impurity 


32 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


had  been  washed  away,  as  if  earthly  burdens  had 
slipped  from  me.  I was  as  if  in  heaven.  I felt  the 
presence  of  God,  and  that  only.  And  as  Odar- 
chenko  called  out  the  names  of  the  newly  departed 
warriors  who  had  sacrificed  their  lives  on  the  field 
of  battle  for  faith  and  Tsar  and  fatherland,  I felt 
that  the  official  title  given  them  was  not  merely  an 
official  verbosity,  but  they  were  indeed  a Christ- 
serving  army,  and  that  war,  as  it  was,  so  it  is  and 
ЛѴІ11  be  to  the  end  of  the  world,  a great  honourable 
and  holy  doing  . . , 

Prince  {after  some  silence). — Well,  and  when  you 
buried  your  people  in  this  serene  way,  is  it  possible, 
however,  you  did  not  remember  the  enemy  whom 
you  had  killed  in  such  great  numbers  ? 

General. — No,  glory  be  to  God  ! We  managed 
to  move  a little  further  back  so  that  that  carrion 
did  not  remind  us  of  its  presence. 

Lady. — Ah,  now  you’ve  spoilt  the  whole  impres- 
sion. How  could  you  ? 

General  {turning  to  the  Prince). — And  what 
would  you  personally  have  wished  of  me  ? That  I 
should  give  Christian  burial  to  these  jackals  who  were 
neither  Christian  nor  Mussulmen,  but  de\il  knows 
what  ? If  I had  gone  out  of  my  mind,  and  had 
indeed  ordered  that  they  be  buried  together  with 
our  Cossacks  in  one  funeral  servdce,  you  would 
very  probably  have  convicted  me  of  religious 
assault.  How,  man?  You  actual!}^  subject  these 
dear  unfortunates,  who  in  their  lifetime  worshipped 
the  devil,  to  a superstitious  and  coarse  pseudo- 
Christian  ritual ! No,  I had  something  else  to  do. 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


33 


I gave  orders  and  made  a manifesto  to  the  effect 
that  none  of  the  people  approach  within  three 
sazhens  of  this  devil’s  carrion,  for  I saw  that  my 
Cossacks’  fingers  had  long  since  been  itching  to  feel 
their  pockets  according  to  custom.  And  who  knew 
what  plague  might  have  been  let  loose  on  us  ! It 
might  have  been  the  death  of  us  all. 

Prince. — Have  I then  understood  you  aright  ? 
You  were  afraid,  lest  the  Cossacks  going  to  rob 
the  bodies  of  the  Bashi-Bazouks  should  carry 
infection  into  your  camp  ? 

General. — Yes,  that’s  just  what  I was  afraid  of. 
It  seems  clear. 

Prince. — There’s  your  Christ-serving  army  ! 

General. — The  Cossacks,  eh  ? . . . Robbers  in 
spirit ! Always  were  and  always  will  be. 

Prince. — Are  we  talking  in  our  sleep  ? 

General. — Yes,  it  seems  to  me  as  if  something 
didn’t  fit.  I never  seem  to  catch  your  drift.  What 
were  you  wishing  to  ask  ? 

Politician. — The  Prince  is  probably  astonished 
that  your  ideal,  almost  holy  Cossacks,  suddenly 
appear  to  be,  in  your  own  words,  robbers. 

Prince. — Yes,  and  I ask  in  what  way  can  war  be 
a great,  honourable  and  holy  doing  when  all  it  comes 
to,  even  by  your  own  showing,  is  a struggle  of  one 
set  of  robbers  with  another. 

General. — Eh  ! So  that’s  what  you  were  after — 
“ A struggle  of  one  set  of  robbers  with  another.” 
Yes,  there  is  something  in  what  you  say.  I agree 
that  it  is  with  another  set  of  robbers,  with  an 
altogether  other  set.  Or  do  you  in  sober  reality 

w.c.  D 


34 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


think  that  to  steal  when  you  have  the  chance  is  the 
same  sort  of  thing  as  to  roast  a baby  in  the  eyes  of 
its  mother  ? Now  this  is  what  I say  to  you.  My 
conscience  is  so  clear  about  this  affair  that  I some- 
times am  sorry  from  the  depths  of  my  heart  that  I 
did  not  die  at  the  moment  when  I gave  the  order 
for  the  last  volley.  I have  not  the  slightest  doubt 
that  dying  then  I should  have  gone  straight  with  my 
thirty-seven  Cossacks  to  the  Almighty,  and  we  should 
have  taken  our  places  in  Paradise  side  by  side  vdth 
the  repentant  thief  of  the  Gospel.  The  story  of  the 
penitent  thief  is  not  given  by  chance  in  the  Gospel. 

Prince. — I agree  ; only  you  will  certainly  not 
find  it  said  in  the  Gospel  that  repentant  thieves  are 
only  found  among  people  of  our  own  nation  and  our 
own  faith. 

General. — When  did  I make  any  distinction  of 
nationality  or  religion  in  this  business  ? Are  the 
Armenians  my  fellow-countrymen  or  fellow-Church- 
men,  or  did  I ask  of  what  faith  were  this  de%drs  brood 
which  I destroyed  with  our  artillery  ? 

Prince. — However,  you  do  not  seem  to  have  been 
able  to  recollect  that  this  same  de\’irs  brood  were 
aU  the  same,  human  beings,  and  that  in  every  man 
there  is  a sense  of  good  and  evil,  and  that  every 
robber,  be  he  Cossack  or  Bashi-Bazouk,  has  the 
chance  of  holding  the  position  of  the  repentant  thief 
of  the  Gospel. 

General. — Have  done  with  all  that ! First  you 
say  that  an  evil  man  is  in  nature  like  an  irresponsible 
beast,  then  you  say  that  the  Bashi-Bazouk  roasting 
a baby  might  turn  out  to  be  the  penitent  thief  of  the 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


35 


Gospel ! And  you  put  all  this  forward  with  the  one 
end  that  we  should  not  oppose  evil,  even  with  a 
finger.  But  according  to  my  lights,  what  is  impor- 
tant is  not  that  in  every  man  are  the  roots  of  good 
and  evil,  but  which  of  the  two  prevails.  It  is  not  so 
interesting  that  out  of  every  kind  of  grape- juice  it 
is  possible  to  make  both  wine  and  vinegar  as  to 
know  what  actually  is  in  that  bottle  there,  wine  or 
vinegar.  Because  if  it  is  vinegar  and  I begin  to 
drink  it  by  tumblerfuls  and  to  offer  it  to  others  under 
the  pretext  that  it  is  made  from  one  and  the  same 
material  as  wine,  I shall  certainly  help  no  one  by 
that  wisdom,  unless  spoiling  their  stomachs  is  any 
help.  All  people  are  brothers.  Splendid  ! Very 
glad  ! Yes,  but  what  further  ? Brothers  are  of 
different  sorts.  And  why  not  be  interested  to  know 
which  of  my  brothers  is  Cain  and  which  Abel  ? 
And  if  before  my  eyes  my  brother  Cain  fall  upon  my 
brother  Abel,  and  I then  through  lack  of  equanimity 
give  brother  Cain  such  a box  on  the  ear  that  he’s  not 
likely  to  do  it  again, — you  suddenly  reproach  me  that 
I have  forgotten  to  be  brotherly.  I perfectly 
remember  why  I interfered,  and  if  I had  not  re- 
membered I could  quite  calmly  have  passed  by  on 
the  other  side. 

Prince. — Whence  this  dilemma  : to  pass  by  on 
the  other  side,  or  to  give  a box  on  the  ear  ? 

General. — A third  way  you  seldom  find  on  such 
occasions.  You  have  proposed  prayer  to  God  for 
His  direct  interference,  that  He  should  instantly,  and 
with  His  strong  right  arm,  bring  each  devil’s  son  to 
reason — though  you  yourself,  it  seems,  renounce  this 


D 2 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


36 

means.  But  I hold  that  this  means  is  good  in  any 
business  and  that  there  is  no  substitute.  Honest 
folk  say  grace  before  dinner,  but  they  chew  with 
their  own  jaws.  It  was  not  without  prayer  that  I 
gave  the  orders  to  the  horse  artШer}^ 

Prince. — Such  a prayer  is,  of  course,  blasphemy. 
It  is  necessary  not  so  much  to  pray  to  God  as  to  act 
according  to  the  wih  of  God. 

General. — For  instance  ? 

Prince. — He  who  is  filled  with  the  true  spirit  of 
the  Gospel  will  find  in  himself,  when  necessary,  the 
powder,  with  w'ords  and  gestures  and  with  his  w’hole 
appearance  to  act  upon  the  mind  of  his  unfortunate 
dark  brother  who  wishes  to  commit  a murder  or  some 
other  evil, — he  will  be  able  to  make  on  him  such  a 
staggering  impression  that  he  will  at  once  under- 
stand his  mistake  and  turn  away  from  the  false  road. 

General. — Holy  mart^Ts  ! Do  you  mean  to  say 
that  I should  have  gone  forward  to  the  Bashi- 
Bazouks  who  murdered  the  babies,  and  made  touch- 
ing gestures  and  said  touching  words  ? 

Mr.  Z. — Words,  owing  to  the  distance  and  to  your 
mutual  ignorance  of  one  another’s  language,  w'ould, 
I imagine,  have  been  completely  out  of  place.  And 
as  far  as  gestures  go  in  making  a staggering  impres- 
sion, as  you  will  of  course,  but  I should  have  thought 
that  under  the  given  circumstances  one  couldn’t 
think  of  anything  better  than  a volley  or  so. 

Lady. — But  reaUy,  do  tell  us.  Prince,  in  wkat 
language  and  by  the  help  of  wkat  instruments  could 
the  General  have  explained  himself  to  the  Bashi- 
Bazouks  ? 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


37 


Prince. — I did  not  at  all  mean  that  they  could 
treat  the  Bashi-Bazouks  according  to  the  spirit  of  the 
Gospel.  I only  said  that  a man  filled  with  the  true 
spirit  of  the  Gospel  would  have  found  the  possibility 
on  that  occasion,  as  indeed  on  any  other  occasion,  to 
awaken  in  their  dark  souls  the  good  which  lies  hidden 
in  every  human  being. 

Mr.  Z. — You  really  think  so  ? 

Prince. — I do  not  doubt  it  in  the  least. 

Mr.  Z. — And  do  you  think  that  Christ  was  su-ffi,- 
ciently  penetrated  by  the  true  spirit  of  the  Gospel, 
or  no  ? 

Prince. — What  sort  of  a question  is  that  ? 

Mr.  Z. — Well,  this  is  what  I'd  like  to  know  : why 
did  not  Christ  bring  the  evangelical  spirit  to  bear  in 
such  a way  upon  the  souls  of  Judas,  Herod,  the 
Jewish  Sanhedrin,  and  the  unrepentant  thief, 
whom  commonly  people  forget  when  they  speak  of 
his  repentant  companion  ? Why  did  He  not  bring 
out  the  good  in  them  ? From  a positive  Christian 
point  there  is  no  insurmountable  difficulty  in  it. 
But  you  have  got  to  give  up  one  of  two  things  : 
either  your  habit  of  taking  refuge  with  Christ  and 
the  Gospel  as  with  the  highest  authority,  or  your 
moral  optimism,  because  the  third  way,  the  well- 
worn  way,  of  denying  the  evangelical  fact  itself  as  a 
modern  fiction  or  priestly  interpretation,  is  in  the 
present  instance  completely  closed  to  you.  However 
you  ransack  the  four  Gospels  for  texts,  the  principal 
fact  from  the  point  of  view  of  our  question  will 
remain  indisputable,  and  that  is,  that  Christ  Himself 
suffered  bitter  persecution  and  death  because  of  the 


38 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


malice  of  His  enemies.  That  He  Himself  remained 
morally  higher  than  all  that  malice,  that  He  did  not 
wish  to  ofier  any  opposition,  and  that  He  forgave 
His  enemies,  is  as  comprehensible  from  my  point  of 
view  as  from  yours.  But  why  did  He  not,  forgiving 
His  enemies,  deliver  their  souls  from  that  dreadful 
darkness  in^  which  they  then  were  ? Why  did  He 
not  overcome  their  malice  by  the  force  of  His  own 
sweetness  ? Why  did  He  not  awaken  the  sleeping 
good  in  them  ? Why  did  He  not  give  them  light 
and  new  spiritual  birth  ? In  a word,  why  did  He 
not  act  upon  Judas,  Herod,  and  the  Jewish  Sanhedrin 
in  the  same  way  as  He  acted  upon  the  one  repentant 
thief  ? Either  He  could  not  or  He  would  not. 
In  both  instances  it  turns  out,  according  to  you,  that 
He  was  not  sufficiently  penetrated  vdth  the  true 
spirit  of  the  Gospel,  and  as  we  are  speaking,  if  I do 
not  mistake,  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ  and  not  of  any 
other  gospel,  it  appears  that  Christ  was  not  suffi- 
ciently penetrated  with  the  true  spirit  of  Christ — 
upon  which  result  I offer  you  my  congratulations. 

Prince. — Oh,  I am  not  going  to  enter  into  verbal 
fencing  with  you  any  more  than  I am  going  to  enter 
into  real  fencing  with  the  General,  with  “ Christ- 
serving  ” swords  . . . 

[At  this  point  the  Prince  got  up  from  his  seat  and 
wished  apparently  to  say  something  very  powerful, 
expecting  with  one  blow,  without  any  fencing,  to  over- 
whelm his  antagonist,  but  at  that  moment  it  began  to 
strike  seven  from  a neighbouring  belfry.) 

Lady.  —Dinner-time  ! What’s  more,  we  mustn’t 
finish  such  a discussion  in  a hurry.  After  dinner 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


39 


we’ll  have  our  game  of  vint,  but  to-morrow  we  must, 
we  absolutely  must,  go  on  with  this  conversation. 
{To  the  Politician)  You  agree  ? 

Politician. — What,  to  continue  this  conver- 
sation ? I was  overjoyed  that  it  had  come  to  an 
end  ! The  dispute  had  taken  the  rather  unpleasant 
complexion  of  a holy  war  ! It  was  too  hot  work 
for  this  time  of  the  year.  My  health  I can  tell  you, 
is  dearer  to  me  than  any  of  these  things. 

Lady. — Don’t  pretend  ! You  must,  you  abso- 
lutely must,  take  part.  It’s  no  use  your  lounging 
there  stretched  out  on  your  deck  chair  like  a 
mysterious  Mephistopheles. 

Politician. — Well,  I might  agree  to  take  part 
to-morrow,  but  only  on  condition  that  there  be  less 
religion  in  it.  I don’t  ask  you  to  exclude  it  altogether, 
as  it  seems  that  would  be  impossible.  Only  let  there 
be  less,  for  God’s  sake,  a little  less  1 

Lady. — Your  “ for  God’s  sake  ” is  on  this  occa- 
sion very  sweet. 

Mr.  Z.  {to  the  Politician). — The  best  means  of 
making  sure  that  there  shall  be  less  religion  would 
be  for  you  to  speak  much  more,  wouldn’t  it  ? 

Politician. — I promise  ! Only  to  listen  is,  all 
the  same,  more  pleasant  than  to  talk,  especially 
in  this  fine  air ; but  for  the  salvation  of  our  little 
circle  from  mutual  conflict,  which  might  possibly 
reflect  itself  in  an  unpleasant  way  in  our  vint,  I am 
ready  to  sacrifice  myself  for  two  hours. 

Lady. — Splendid  ! And  the  day  after  to-morrow 
then,  we  will  finish  this  discussion  about  the  Bible. 
The  Prince  will  get  ready  some  absolutely  irrefut- 


40 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


able  argument.  Only  you  also  must  be  present  at 
the  end.  You  need  a little  instruction  in  the 
Scriptures. 

Politician. — What  ! The  day  after  to-morrow, 
as  well  ? No,  no  ! My  self-sacrifice  won’t  go  as 
far  as  that.  What’s  more,  I must  go  to  Nice  the  day 
after  to-morrow. 

Lady. — To  Nice  ? What  naive  diplomacy  you 
are  practising  upon  us  ! It’s  no  good.  We’ve  long 
since  learnt  to  read  your  cypher,  and  now  every- 
body knows  that  when  you  say  you’re  going  to  Nice 
it  means  you’re  off  to  Monte  Carlo  for  a spree.  Never 
mind,  we’ll  manage  somehow  without  you.  Go  and 
wallow  in  material  things,  since  you’re  not  afraid 
of  the  fact  that  you  will  have  to  join  the  world  of 
spirits  later  on.  Go  to  Monte  Carlo,  and  may  Provi- 
dence reward  you  according  to  your  deserts  ! 

Politician. — My  deserts  don’t  concern  Provi- 
dence, as  it  happens,  but  only  a little  business 
which  I have  got  to  see  through.  I might  try  my 
luck  with  a little  small  change  at  roulette,  I admit, 
but  I shouldn’t  spend  much. 

Lady. — Only  to-morrow  then,  we  must  all  be 
present. 


SECOND  CONVERSATION 


“ Audiatur  et  altera  pars.” 

On  the  following  day,  at  the  appointed  hour,  1 
met  the  others  at  afternoon  tea  under  the  palm 
trees.  Only  the  Prince  was  absent.  We  had  to  wait 
for  him.  As  I did  not  play  cards  I wrote  down  the 
whole  of  this  conversation  from  the  very  beginning. 
This  time  the  Politician  spoke  so  much  and  in  such 
a drawling  way  that  to  note  down  literally  every- 
thing he  said  would  be  impossible.  I have  men- 
tioned a sufficient  number  of  his  remarks  and  have 
endeavoured  to  preserve  the  general  meaning.  In 
many  instances  I can  merely  convey  in  my  own 
words  the  substance  of  his  discourses. 

Politician. — I have  long  observed  a certain 
peculiarity  : people  who  have  made  a special  hobby 
of  some  kind  of  higher  morality  cannot  master  the 
simplest  and  most  indispensable,  and  according 
to  me,  the  most  necessary  virtue — common  polite- 
ness. We  must  therefore  be  grateful  to  the  Almighty 
that  in  our  midst  there  are  comparatively  few  pos- 
sessed of  this  idea  of  higher  morality.  I say  idea 
advisedly,  because  in  reality  I have  never  met  with 
it,  nor  do  I believe  in  its  existence. 

Lady. — Well,  that  is  not  new,  but  what  you  say 
about  politeness  is  true.  Try,  before  you  have 
come  to  the  sujet  en  question,  to  prove  that  polite- 
ness is  the  only  indispensable  virtue  ; try  to  prove 


42 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


it  even  superficially,  as  musical  instruments  are 
tuned  before  the  overture  begins. 

Politician. — Yes,  in  such  cases  only  separate 
sounds  are  heard.  Such  monotony  would  also  pre- 
vail now,  for  scarcely  anyone  would  care  to  defend 
another  opinion  before  the  arrival  of  the  Prince. 
Besides,  to  speak  of  politeness  to-day  in  his  presence 
would  not  be  quite  polite. 

Lady. — Certainly.  And  how  about  your 

argument  ? 

Politician. — This,  I think  you  will  agree  that 
one  can  exist  quite  well  in  a society  лѵЬеге  there 
are  no  chaste,  disinterested  or  unselfish  persons.  I, 
at  any  rate,  have  got  on  very  well  in  such  company. 

Lady. — At  Monte  Carlo  ! 

Politician.  — At  Monte  Carlo  and  everywhere  else. 
In  fact,  nowhere  is  there  felt  to  be  a demand  for  even 
a single  representative  of  the  higher  \drtues.  But 
try  to  live  in  a society  where  there  is  not  a single 
polite  person. 

General. — I do  not  know  to  what  society  you 
are  good  enough  to  refer,  but  during  the  campaigns 
in  Khiva  and  Turkey  something  more  than  polite- 
ness was  needed. 

Politician.^ — You  might  as  well  have  added  that 
for  travellers  in  Central  Africa  more  than  politeness 
was  required.  I speak  of  well-organised  daily  life 
in  the  cultured  society  of  human  beings,  and  that 
requires  none  of  the  higher  \’irtues  or  of  Christianity 
so-called.  {Turning  to  Mr.  Z.)  You  shake  your  head. 

Mr.  Z. — I recall  to  mind  a painful  incident  which 
was  told  me. 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


43 


Lady. — And  what  was  that  ? 

Mr.  Z. — My  friend  N.  died  quite  suddenly. 

General. — The  well-known  novelist  ? 

Mr.  Z. — The  same. 

Politician. — ^The  newspapers  wrote  rather  mys- 
teriously about  his  death. 

Mr.  Z. — Precisely — very  mysteriously. 

Lady.  — But  what  made  you  think  of  him  just  now  ? 
Did  he  die  from  somebody’s  lack  of  politeness  ? 

Mr.  Z. — On  the  contrary,  merely  from  his  own 
exaggerated  politeness. 

General. — And  even  on  this  point  we  do  not 
appear  to  agree. 

Lady. — If  possible,  tell  us  all  about  it. 

Mr.  Z. — There  is  nothing  to  hide.  My  friend, 
who  also  thought  that  politeness,  although  not  the 
only  virtue,  was,  at  all  events,  the  most  necessary 
step  in  social  morality,  considered  it  his  bounden 
duty  to  fulfil  all  its  dictates.  Among  the  duties 
which  he  imposed  on  himself  was  that  of  reading 
all  letters  addressed  to  him,  even  from  unknown 
people,  as  well  as  books  and  pamphlets  for  re- 
view. He  read  all  the  letters  and  noticed  all  the 
books.  He  conscientiously  carried  out  every  request 
addressed  to  him,  and  consequently  was  busy  all  day 
with  other  people’s  affairs,  while  his  own  occupied 
him  at  night.  What  is  more,  he  accepted  all  invi- 
tations and  received  all  comers.  While  my  friend 
was  young  and  could  stand  strong  drinks  the  hard 
labour  imposed  by  politeness,  although  under- 
mining his  health,  did  not  degenerate  into  tragedy. 
Wine  cheered  his  heart  and  saved  him  from  despair. 


44 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


Sometimes,  when  ready  to  seize  a rope  with  which  to 
hang  himself,  he  stretched  out  his  hand  for  the  bottle, 
and  that  gave  him  courage.  Constitutionally  he  was 
weak,  and  at  the  age  of  forty-five  he  had  to  give  up 
strong  drink.  When  sober,  this  slavery  seemed  heU 
to  him,  and  now,  I am  informed,  he  has  committed 
suicide. 

Lady. — What ! And  simply  from  politeness  ? 
But  he  was  mad  ! 

Mr.  Z. — No  doubt  he  lost  his  reason,  but  I venture 
to  think  that  word  “ simply  ” is  not  applicable  to 
this  case. 

General. — I have  also  seen  similar  cases  of  in- 
sanity, and  if  one  tried  to  fathom  them  one  might 
also  go  mad.  It  is  far  from  simple. 

Politician. — In  every  case  it  is  clear  that  polite- 
ness has  nothing  to  do  with  the  matter.  The 
Spanish  throne  was  no  more  to  blame  for  the  madness 
of  the  chinovnik  Poprischin^  than  the  necessity  to 
be  polite  was  answerable  for  your  friend’s  insanity. 

Mr.  Z. — Of  course,  I am  not  against  politeness, 
but  only  against  making  a law  of  politeness. 

Politician. — Absolute  rules,  as  everything  abso- 
lute, are  merely  the  inventions  of  people  bereft  of 
common  sense  and  of  the  feeling  of  living  reality.  I 
do  not  admit  any  absolute  rules,  I only  accept 
indispensable  rules.  For  instance,  I am  well  aware 
that  if  I do  not  adopt  the  rule  of  cleanliness  the  result 
will  be  unpleasant  to  myself  and  to  others.  In  order 
not  to  experience  unpleasant  sensations,  I adhere  un- 
alterably to  the  rule  of  washing  myself  every  da}',  to 
^ In  Gogol’s  “ Diary  of  a Madman." 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


45 


putting  on  clean  linen,  etc.,  not  because  it  is  a gene- 
rally received  custom  of  other  people  or  myself,  or 
because  it  is  a sacred  duty,  or  a sin  to  neglect  it,  but 
merely  because  uncleanliness,  ipso  facto,  is  a material 
inconvenience.  Just  the  same  applies  to  politeness, 
of  which  cleanliness  is  a component  part.  For  me 
and  for  others  it  is  much  more  convenient  to  perform 
than  to  neglect  the  rules  of  politeness,  and  therefore 
I adhere  to  them.  Your  friend  imagined  that 
politeness  meant  answering  all  letters  and  executing 
all  requests  without  reference  to  convenience  and 
personal  advantage  ; that  was  not  politeness,  but 
a kind  of  foolish  self-sacrifice. 

Mr.  Z. — Morbid  development  of  conscientiousness 
became,  in  his  case,  a mania,  which  kUled  him. 

Lady.- — But  it  is  awful  that  a man  should  perish 
through  such  nonsense.  Could  not  you  bring  him  to 
reason  ? 

Mr.  Z. — I did  my  best,  and  was  even  assisted  by 
a pilgrim  from  Mount  Athos,  who  was  half  crazy, 
but  a very  remarkable  person.  My  friend  greatly 
respected  him  and  often  consulted  him  in  spiritual 
matters.  That  man  struck  at  once  at  the  root  of 
the  trouble.  I knew  the  pilgrim  well  and  was  often 
present  at  the  discussions. 

When  my  friend  began  telling  him  about  his  moral 
doubts,  saying — was  he  right  in  this  or  had  he 
sinned  in  that,  Varsonophia  sharply  interrupted 
him  : “ Eh,  why  are  you  grieving  about  your  sins — 
don’t ! Listen  to  me  : sin  five  hundred  and  thirty- 
nine  times  in  a day,  but  don’t  grieve  about  it ; that’s 
the  chief  thing.  If  to  sin  is  evil,  then  to  remember 


4б 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


sin  is  evil.  There  is  nothing  worse  than  to  call  to 
mind  one’s  own  sins.  Better  think  of  the  evil  which 
others  do  to  you,  there  is  some  use  in  that ; for  the 
future  you  will  beware  of  such  persons.  As  for  your 
evil  actions — forget  them,  so  that  they  may  disap- 
pear altogether.  There  is  only  one  deadly  sin  and 
that  is  despondency.  From  despondency  comes 
despair  ; and  that  is  more  than  sin,  it  is  spiritual 
death.  Well,  and  what  other  sins  are  there  ? How 
about  drunkenness  ? A sensible  man  drinks  when 
he  is  thirsty ; he  does  not  drink  at  random,  but  a 
fool  gorges  himself  even  with  plain  water,  therefore 
the  evil  is  not  in  the  wine,  but  in  the  foolishness. 
Some  people  in  their  foolishness  burn  their  insides 
vniYivodka,  and  even  their  outsides  turn  black  and 
sparks  fly  about.  I have  seen  it  vdth  my  owm  eyes. 
It  is  something  worse  than  sin  when  the  fiery  Gehenna 
pierces  through  the  skin.  As  regards  aU  the  various 
violations  of  the  seventh  commandment,  I will  speak 
according  to  my  conscience  : it  is  difficult  to  judge 
and  impossible  to  praise  ! I do  not  recommend  it  ! 
There  is  no  denying  it  is  a thrilling  pleasure,  but  it 
leads  to  sorrow  and  shortens  life.  If  з^ои  don’t  beUeve 
me,  see  here  what  a learned  German  doctor  vTites.” 
And  Varsonophia  took  an  antiquated-looking  book 
from  the  shelf  and  began  turning  over  its  leaves. 
“ Here  is  Hufiand.  See  page  176.”  And  he  read 
sententiously  how  the  German  author  warns  against 
the  foolish  waste  of  vital  power.  “ WeU,  з"ои  see, 
why  should  a reasonable  man  exhaust  his  strength  ? 
In  early,  reckless  years  evil  is  done  and  health  is  lost. 
But  to  recall  all  the  past  and  be  distressed,  sa3ing 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


47 


why  did  I lose  my  innocence,  my  purity  of  soul  and 
body,  that  is  sheer  nonsense  ; it  is  simply  playing 
the  buffoon  to  the  devil.  Of  course  it  flatters  the 
devil  that  your  soul  should  not  rise  higher,  but 
remain  in  the  same  dirty  slum.  Here  is  my  advice  : 
When  the  devil  begins  to  trouble  about  all  this 
repentance,  just  spit  upon  him  and  say  ‘ Here  are 
all  my  heavy  sins,  they  are  not  very  important.’ 
I promise  he  will  leave  you  in  peace  ! I speak  from 
experience.  . . . And  for  what  other  infractions 
of  the  law  are  you  responsible  ? You  wouldn’t 
steal  ? And  if  you  did  there  is  no  great  harm  ; 
nowadays  everyone  steals.  It  follows  зюи  mustn’t 
worry  about  these  trifles,  but  only  beware  of 
being  despondent.  When  thoughts  come  about 
sins — ^have  not  I wronged  or  offended  some  one  ? — 
go  to  the  theatre,  or  to  some  merry  friends,  or  read 
some  funny  stories.  And  if  a rule  is  wanted,  here 
it  is  : be  firm  in  belief,  not  from  fear  of  sin,  but 
because  it  is  very  pleasant  for  a wise  man  to  live 
with  God,  for  without  God  life  is  bad.  Study  the 
word  of  God,  for  if  you  read  with  attention  every 
line  is  worth  a rouble  ; pray  earnestly  once  or  twice 
a day.  Don’t  forget  to  wash  yourself,  and  sin- 
cere prayer  is  even  better  for  the  soul  than  soap 
for  the  body.  Fast  for  thy  stomach’s  sake  and  thy 
other  internal  organs ; doctors  advise  fasting  after 
forty.  Don’t  think  about  other  people’s  affairs  or 
trouble  about  philanthropy,  if  you  have  work  to  do  ; 
give  money  to  beggars  not  counting  it ; give  dona- 
tions to  churches  and  monasteries  without  stint ; 
it  will  be  recorded  in  heaven,  and  you  will  be  healthy 


48 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


in  soul  and  body.  Avoid  bigots  who  like  to  pry 
into  other  people’s  souls,  because  their  own  souls  are 
empty.” 

Such  speeches  produced  a favourable  influence  on 
my  friend,  but  they  could  not  drive  away  the  ideas 
which  pressed  on  his  mind,  and  latterly  he  seldom 
saw  Varsonophia. 

Politician. — The  pilgrim  says,  in  substance, 
pretty  much  what  I do. 

Lady. — So  much  the  better.  Really,  what  a 
wonderful  moralist ! Sin  but  don’t  repent — I like 
that  very  much. 

General. — I presume  he  does  not  say  the  same  to 
everybody.  If  it  were  a murderer  or  a blackguard 
I suppose  he  would  give  some  different  teaching. 

Mr.  Z. — Well,  of  course.  But  when  he  meets 
moral,  scrupulous  people  he  instantly  becomes  a 
philosopher  and  even  a fatalist.  A very  clever  and 
well-educated  old  lady  was  delighted  with  him. 
Although  of  the  Russian  orthodox  faith,  she  had 
been  educated  abroad.  She  heard  much  about 
Varsonophia  and  consulted  him  as  though  he  лѵеге 
a directeur  de  conscience,  but  he  did  not  give  her 
a chance  of  saying  much  about  such  trash  ! “ \\Ъо 

wants  it  ? ” said  he.  “ Why  even  I,  a common  mou- 
jik,  find  it  tedious  to  listen  to  you,  and  do  you  think 
that  it  can  interest  God  Almighty  ! And  what  is 
there  to  talk  about ! You  are  old  and  weak  and 
never  will  be  any  better  ! ” She  told  me  this  with 
laughter  and  tears  in  her  eyes.  Still,  she  tried  to 
refute  it,  though  he  finally  convinced  her  by  a story 
about  an  old  hermit.  Varsonophia  also  often  spoke 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


49 


to  me  and  to  N.  about  this  hermit.  Not  a bad  story, 
but  too  long  to  relate  at  present. 

Lady. — But  tell  it  to  us  in  a few  words. 

Mr.  Z. — I will  try.  In  the  desert  of  Nitria  two 
hermits  were  “ working  out  ” their  salvation.  Their 
caves  were  not  far  from  each  other,  but  they  never 
conversed,  only  chanted  psalms  occasionally.  Thus 
they  passed  many  years,  and  their  fame  began  to 
spread  through  Egypt  and  the  neighbouring 
countries.  But  in  course  of  time  the  devil  suc- 
ceeded in  poisoning  their  souls ; they  packed  their 
belongings,  their  baskets  and  beds  of  palm  leaves 
and  branches,  and  marched  off  to  Alexandria.  There 
they  sold  their  work,  and  on  the  money  they  got  for 
it  they  spent  three  days  and  three  nights  with 
drunkards  and  sinners  and  then  returned  to  their 
desert.  One  of  them  lamented  and  cried  most 
bitterly : “ I am  lost  and  accursed  ! Such  madness 
and  evil  doings  can  never  be  forgiven.  All  my 
fastings,  vigils  and  prayers  are  wasted.” 

The  other  pilgrim  walked  beside  him  and  sang 
psalms  joyfully  to  himself.  The  first  cried : 

” Are  you  mad  ? ” 

“ Why  ? ” asked  the  joyful  one. 

“ Aren’t  you  sorry  ? ” 

“ About  what  should  I be  sorry  ? ” 

“ And  about  Alexandria  ? ” 

” Glory  be  to  the  Almighty,  who  preserves  the 
famous  and  God-fearing  city.” 

“ And  what  did  we  do  at  Alexandria  ? ” 

" Of  course  we  sold  our  baskets,  bowed  low  ts 
St,  Mark  and  visited  the  other  temples  ; we  waited 
w.c.  E 


50 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


on  the  pious  protector  of  the  city,  we  conversed  with 
the  virtuous  matron  Leonilla  . . 

“ Did  not  we  spend  the  night  in  a house  of  ill- 
fame  ? ” 

“ God  preserve  us  ! The  evening  and  night  we 
passed  in  the  patriarch’s  hostelry.” 

“ Holy  martyrs  ! Why  he  is  ой  his  head.  . . . 
And  was  it  not  there  that  we  were  filled  with  wine  ? ’ ’ 

“ We  tasted  wine  and  food  from  the  patriarch’s 
hospitable  board  on  the  occasion  of  the  Presen- 
tation of  the  Blessed  Virgin  in  the  Temple.” 

“ Wretched  man  ! And  who  kissed  us,  to  say 
nothing  worse  ? . . 

“ And  at  parting  we  received  a holy  kiss  from 
that  holy  father  of  fathers,  the  blessed  Archbishop 
of  Alexandria  and  of  all  Egypt ; yes,  and  of 
Libya  and  of  Pentapolis  and  of  Kur-Timothee  with 
its  spiritual  court,  and  with  all  the  fathers  and 
brothers  of  his  divinely  appointed  clergy.” 

‘‘  But  are  you  mocking  me  ? Or  has  the  devil 
possessed  you  after  yesterday’s  evil  deeds  ? You, 
cursed  man,  have  embraced  sinners  ! ” 

” Well,  I do  not  know  into  whom  the  devil  has 
entered : into  me  who  rejoice  in  the  gifts  of  God  and 
in  the  kindness  extended  to  us  by  the  heads  of  the 
Church,  and  praise  the  Creator  with  aU  creation,  or 
into  you,  who  rave  and  call  the  house  of  our  blessed 
father  and  pastor  a house  of  ill-fame,  and  defame 
the  God-loving  clergy,  calling  them  sinners,  as  it 
were ! ” 

“Oh,  thou  heretic ! Aryan  ohspring,  cursed 
lips  of  Apollonion  ! ” 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


51 


The  hermit,  afflicted  by  his  sinful  transgressions, 
threw  himself  on  his  companion  and  began  beating 
him  with  all  his  might.  After  this  they  went  in 
silence  to  their  caves. 

The  despondent  hermit  filled  the  desert  with 
lamentations,  groans  and  sobs,  beating  his  head 
against  the  stone  floor.  In  the  morning  a new 
idea  occupied  his  mind  ; “ By  many  years  of  good 
deeds  I earned  the  special  blessing  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  which  has  already  appeared  in  signs  and 
wonders.  But  after  that,  by  lowering  myself  to 
carnal  lusts,  I sinned  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
that  sin,  according  to  the  word  of  God,  will  not  be 
forgiven  in  this  world  or  the  next.  I cast  the  pearl 
of  heavenly  purity  before  swine,  i.e.,  before  devils, 
who,  treading  on  it,  will  turn  and  rend  me.  But 
if  in  any  case  I am  lost  for  ever,  what  have  I to  do 
in  the  desert  ? ” 

And  he  went  to  Alexandria  and  led  a loose  life. 
When  in  want  of  money  he  joined  himself  to  other 
dissolute  revellers,  killing  and  robbing  a rich  mer- 
chant. The  crime  was  discovered,  he  was  taken  to 
the  town  court,  condemned  to  death,  and  he  died 
without  repentance.  Meanwhile,  his  former  com- 
panion, continuing  his  asceticism,  attained  the 
highest  Church  dignities  and  was  renowned  for 
wonderful  deeds.  At  his  word  even  barren  women 
bore  male  children.  When  the  day  of  his  death 
came  his  shrivelled  and  dried  up  body  suddenly 
became  young  and  beautiful,  it  shone  and  per- 
fumed the  ambient  air.  A monastery  was  erected 
over  his  wonder-working  body,  and  his  name  passed 


52 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


from  the  Church  in  Alexandria  to  Byzantium,  and 
thence  to  the  shrines  of  Kiev  and  Moscow.  “The 
lesson  of  this  story,”  said  Varsono,  “ is  that  all  sins 
are  harmless  except  despondency.  The  two  men 
committed  every  iniquity  conjointly,  but  only  one 
of  them  perished,  namely,  he  who  desponded.” 

General. — You  see,  monks  must  have  a coura- 
geous spirit,  but  nowadays  even  soldiers  are 
discouraged. 

Mr.  Z. — It  seems  we  have  drifted  from  the  ques- 
tion of  politeness,  but  have  returned  to  our  prin- 
cipal subject. 

Lady. — And  here  comes  the  Prince.  How  are 
you  ? In  your  absence  we  have  been  speaking 
about  politeness. 

Prince. — Please  excuse  me,  I could  not  get  away 
earlier.  I received  a lot  of  papers  and  printed  matter 
from  our  friends.  I will  show  them  to  you  later  on. 

Lady. — And  I will  afterwards  tell  you  a holy 
anecdote,  which  entertained  us  in  your  absence. 
It  was  about  two  monks.  But  now  it  is  the  turn 
of  our  Monte  Carloist  to  speak.  Well,  let  us  know 
what  he  has  to  say  about  war  after  yesterday’s 
conversation. 

Politician. — From  yesterday’s  conversation  I 
remember  the  reference  to  Vladimir  Monomakh, 
and  the  General’s  military  story.  Let  this  be  the 
starting  point  for.  the  further  discussion  of  the 
question.  It  is  impossible  to  deny  that  Vladimir 
Monomakh  did  well  when  he  defeated  the  Poloftsi, 
and  that  the  General  did  his  duty  when  he  destroyed 
the  Bashi-Bazouks. 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


53 


Lady. — ^That  means  that  you  agree. 

Politician. — I agree  with  what  I have  had  the 
honour  of  telling  you,  namely,  that  Monomakh  and 
the  General  acted  in  the  way  they  were  bound  to 
do  in  the  given  situation  ; but  how  are  we  to  appre- 
ciate that  situation,  or  to  justify  the  perpetuation 
of  war  and  militarism  ? 

Prince. — That  is  precisely  what  I say. 

Lady. — And  the  United  States  ? 

Politician. — I thank  you  for  the  happy  example. 
I speak  of  the  creation  of  a State.  Of  course,  the 
United  States,  as  a European  colony,  was  founded  as 
all  other  colonies,  not  by  war,  but  by  navigation. 
However,  as  soon  as  that  colony  desired  to  be  a 
State,  it  had  to  obtain  its  political  independence  by 
a lengthy  war. 

Prince. — Because  a State  is  created  by  war, 
which  certainly  cannot  be  denied,  you  evidently 
conclude  that  war  is  important,  while  I conclude 
that  it  proves  the  unimportance  of  the  State.  I 
mean,  of  course,  for  people  who  have  refused  to  bow 
down  to  brute  force. 

Politician. — And  why  do  you  speak  of  wor- 
shipping brute  force  ? Try  to  organise  a sound 
community  of  human  beings  without  Government 
control,  then  only  can  you  discuss  the  non-impor- 
tance of  Governments.  Until  then,  the  State  and  all 
that  you  and  I owe  it,  remains  an  established  fact, 
while  your  attacks  are  mere  insignificant  words. 
Therefore,  I repeat : the  great  historical  meaning  of 
war,  as  the  principal  condition  in  the  foundation  of  a 
State,  is  beside  the  question.  But  I ask  : Must  we 


54 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


not  consider  the  great  business  of  forming  an  Empire 
as  already  accomplished  in  substance  ? Details 
can,  of  course,  be  arranged  even  without  such 
heroic  measures  as  war.  In  ancient  times  and  in  the 
Middle  Ages,  when  the  European  world  of  culture 
was  bu^  an  island  in  the  middle  of  an  ocean  of 
barbarism,  military  organisation  was  necessary  for 
self-preservation.  People  had  to  be  always  in 
readiness  to  drive  away  wild  hordes,  which  came 
from  unknown  regions  to  crush  dawning  civilisation. 
And  now  only  the  non-European  elements  should  be 
termed  islands,  while  European  culture  has  become 
the  ocean  which  surrounds  them.  Our  men  of 
science,  our  adventurers  and  missionaries  have 
scoured  the  whole  terrestrial  globe  and  have  dis- 
covered no  serious  danger  to  the  culture  of  the 
world.  Wild  tribes  are  very  successMly  destro5dng 
themselves  and  are  dying  out ; warlike  barbarians, 
as,  for  instance,  Turks  and  Japanese,  are  becom- 
ing civilised  and  are  losing  their  militarism.  Mean- 
while, the  unification  of  European  nations  in  general 
cultural  life  . . . 

Lady  [under  her  breath). — Monte  Carlo. 

Politician  [continuing  his  oration). — has  been 
so  strengthened  that  fighting  between  those  nations 
assumes  the  character  of  ci\dl  war.  It  would 
be  unpardonable  in  every  respect,  since  there  is 
a possibility  of  arranging  international  quarrels 
peaceably.  To  settle  disputes  by  fighting  would 
at  the  present  time  be  as  fantastic  as  to  go  from 
Petersburg  to  Marseilles  in  a sailing  vessel  or  in  a 
Russian  tarantass  drawn  by  three  horses.  I fully 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY  55 

admit,  however,  that  the  ancient  modes  of  travel 
described  by  Pushkin  and  Lermontof  are  much 
more  poetical  than  the  whistle  of  a steamer  or  the 
cry  “ en  voiture,  messieurs”  I am  equally  prepared 
to  admit  the  aesthetic  superiority  of  “ bristling 
steel  ” and  of  brilliant  regiments  over  the  negotiations 
of  diplomats  and  their  peaceful  congresses.  But  the 
serious  consideration  of  a question,  treating  of  life 
and  death,  must  ignore  aesthetic  beauty,  which  has 
nothing  in  common  with  war,  I do  assure  you  that 
it  is  in  no  way  beautiful,  as  represented  by  the  fancy 
of  the  poet  or  the  artist.  When  it  is  understood  that 
war,  with  all  its  attractive  interest  for  poets  and 
painters,  is  useless,  because  unprofitable,  then  the 
military  feriod  of  history  must  end.  I,  of  course, 
speak  in  general — en  grand.  There  cannot  be  a ques- 
tion of  immediate  disarmament,  but  I am  firmly 
convinced  that  neither  we  nor  our  children  wiU 
ever  witness  great  wars,  real  European  wars.  As  for 
our  grandchildren,  they  will  only  read  in  historical 
works  of  little  wars  somewhere  in  Asia  and  Africa. 

My  reply  concerning  Vladimir  Monomakh  is  as 
follows  ; When  it  became  necessary  to  protect  the 
future  of  the  newly-born  Russian  State  from  the 
inroads  of  Poloftsi,  Tartars,  etc.,  war  was  the  most 
indispensable  and  important  business.  The  same 
may,  to  a certain  extent,  be  said  about  the  epoch  of 
Peter  the  Great,  when  it  was  necessary  to  guarantee 
the  future  of  Russia  as  a European  power.  But 
after  that  the  meaning  of  war  becomes  more  and 
more  an  exploded  question,  and  at  present,  as 
already  stated,  the  military  period  in  Russia,  and 


5б 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


elsewhere,  is  a thing  of  the  past.  What  I have  just 
said  about  our  own  country  is  applicable — certainly, 
mutatis  mutandis  — to  other  European  States. 
Formerly,  war  was  everywhere  the  principal  and 
unavoidable  means  for  the  protection  and  security 
of  government  and  of  national  existence.  Wdren  that 
is  once  attained  war  wih  lose  its  raison  d’etre  and 
cease  to  exist. 

I may  add  that  I am  astonished  at  the  way 
some  modern  philosophers  discuss  the  meaning 
of  war  with  reference  to  the  times.  Has  war  any 
meaning  ? C’est  selon.  Yesterday  war  had  signifi- 
cance everywhere  ; to-day  somewhere,  perhaps  in 
Africa  or  Central  Asia,  where  wdd  tribes  stih  exist ; 
to-morrow  it  will  have  no  meaning  anysvhere.  It 
is  remarkable  that  in  proportion  to  losing  its  prac- 
tical meaning,  war  also  loses,  slowly  but  surely,  its 
mystical  aureole.  It  is  even  evident  among  the 
masses  of  a nation  as  backward  as  our  own.  Judge 
for  yourselves  ; only  the  other  day  the  General 
triumphantly  pointed  out  that  our  saints  were 
either  monks  or  soldiers.  But  I ask  j’ou : to 
what  special  historical  epoch  does  all  this  military 
sanctity  or  saintly  militarism  belong  ? Does  it  not 
form  part  of  that  period  when  war  was  really  un- 
avoidable, beneficial,  and,  if  you  wiU,  holy  doing  ? 
Our  saintly  warriors  were  all  princes  of  the  Kiev 
and  Tartar  epoch.  But  among  them  I do  not 
remember  any  lieutenant-generals  or  other  generals. 
What  does  that  mean  ? Take  two  eminent  warriors 
with  equal  claims  to  sanctity  : the  one  is  considered 
a saint  and  the  other  is  not.  Wdiy,  may  I ask,  is 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


57 


Alexander  Nevsky,  who  beat  the  Livonians  and  the 
Swedes  in  the  thirteenth  century,  a saint,  and  why 
is  Alexander  Suvorof,  who  beat  the  French  in  the 
eighteenth  century,  not  a saint  ? Suvorof  could 
not  be  reproached  with  want  of  sanctity.  He  was 
sincerely  religious,  sang  in  choirs,  read  from  the 
ambon,  and  led  an  unblemished  life.  He  had  no 
love  intrigues,  and  even  his  religious  naivete  would 
rather  be  an  argument  in  favour  of  canonisation. 
But  the  point  is,  that  Alexander  Nevsky  fought  for 
the  national-political  future  of  his  country,  which 
was  already  partly  crushed  by  inroads  from  the 
East,  and  could  scarcely  withstand  the  invasions 
from  the  West.  The  instinctive  common  sense  of 
the  people  understood  the  vital  importance  of 
the  situation  and  conferred  on  their  Prince  the 
highest  recompense  they  could  devise,  canonisation. 
Suvorof’s  exploits,  although  incomparably  more 
important  in  a military  sense,  especially  his  crossing 
the  Alps,  which  was  worthy  of  Hannibal,  were 
absolutely  necessary  to  save  Russia  from  annihila- 
tion. Therefore  he  is  merely  a military  celebrity. 

Lady. — But  the  leaders  of  the  army  who  fought 
Napoleon  in  the  year  1812  were  not  canonised, 
although  they  did  save  Russia. 

Politician. — The  expression  saving  Russia  from 
Napoleon  is  patriotic  rhetoric.  He  would  not  have 
devoured  us,  nor  did  he  intend  to  do  so.  That  we 
finally  overcame  him  certainly  shows  our  national 
Imperial  power  and  raises  our  sentiments  of  patrio- 
tism. But  that  the  war  of  the  year  1812  was  called 
forth  by  some  unavoidable  necessity — that  I can 


58 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


never  admit  ! It  might  have  been  quite  possible  to 
come  to  terms  with  Napoleon  instead  of  provoking 
war.  Although  the  venture  turned  out  successfully 
and  the  end  of  the  war  flattered  our  national  vanity, 
the  result  can  scarcely  be  admitted  to  have  been 
beneficial.  If  two  strong  men  fall  out,  without 
rhyme  or  reason,  and  the  one  overpowers  the  other, 
not  without  injuring  their  health,  I might  call  the 
victor  a fine  fellow  ! But  the  necessity  of  having  such 
an  exhibition  remains  a riddle  for  me.  The  glory 
of  the  year  1812,  and  the  display  of  national  heroism 
at  that  time,  whatever  might  have  been  the  cause 
of  the  war,  are  inexplicable.  A poet  calls  it  a “ holy 
event.”  That  is  all  very  fine  as  far  as  poetry  goes, 
but  I look  at  the  outcome  of  this  ” event  ” and 
behold  the  Archimandrite  Photius,  Magnitzky  and 
Arakcheef  on  the  one  hand,  and  on  the  other  the 
conspiracy  of  the  Dekabrists — i.e.,  thirty  years  of 
the  regime  of  belated  militarism  which  brought 
about  the  defeat  at  Sevastopol. 

Lady. — And  Pushkin  ? 

Politician. — Pushkin  ? . . . \ѴЪу  Pushkin  ? 

Lady. — I read  the  other  day  in  the  newspapers 
that  the  national  poetry  of  Pushkin  was  created  by 
the  military  glory  of  the  year  1812. 

Mr.  Z. — Not  without  the  special  participation  of 
the  artillery,  as  is  apparent  from  the  poet’s  name.^ 

Politician. — It  may  be  so.  But  to  continue.  As 
time  advanced,  the  uselessness,  the  unprofitableness 
of  our  wars  become  more  clearly  e\ddent.  The 
Crimean  War  is  thought  much  of  among  us,  because 
* Pitshka  in  Russian  is  a gun. 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


59 


it  is  supposed  that  its  unsuccessful  termination 
occasioned  the  liberation  of  the  serfs  and  other 
reforms  of  Alexander  II.  If  that  is  so,  then  the  good 
results  of  an  unsuccessful  war,  precisely  because  it  is 
unsuccessful,  do  not  exactly  constitute  an  apology 
for  war  in  general.  If  I,  for  no  good  reason,  jump  off 
a balcony  and  dislocate  my  hand,  and  should  this 
accident  prevent  me  from  signing  a wasteful  bill  of 
exchange,  I should  be  pleased  with  what  happened. 
But  I will  not  maintain  that  it  is  necessary  to  jump 
ОЙ  a balcony  instead  of  walking  down  the  stair- 
case. If  your  head  is  not  injured,  it  is  not  necessary 
for  you  to  get  a damaged  hand  in  order  to  prevent 
you  from  attaching  your  signature  to  a ruinous 
transaction.  The  same  common  sense  that  will 
preserve  you  from  jumping  off  balconies  will  also 
preserve  you  from  signing  bills  foolishly.  I think 
that  without  the  Crimean  War  the  reforms  of  the 
Emperor  Alexander  II.  would  have  probably  been 
introduced,  and  perhaps  in  a more  comprehensive 
and  sounder  manner.  I shall  not  go  on  proving  this 
thesis  any  further,  but  will  return  to  our  subject. 
In  any  case,  political  actions  cannot  be  valued  by 
unforeseen  consequences.  The  very  beginning  of  the 
Crimean  War,  i.e.,  the  attack  of  our  army  on  the 
Danube  in  1853,  cannot  be  reasonably  justified.  I 
cannot  call  a policy  sound  which  one  day  protects 
Turkey  from  the  invasion  of  the  Egyptian  Pasha, 
Mehmet  Ali,  contrary  to  our  interests,  and  the  next 
day  prepares  the  destruction  of  the  same  Turkey 
which  it  has  saved  and  strengthened,  to  say  nothing 
of  having  risked  a quarrel  with  the  Anglo-French 


6o 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


coalition.  This  is  no  policy,  but  a kind  of  Don 
Quixotism  in  connection  with  our  last  Turkish 
campaign.  I hope  the  General  will  pardon  me. 

Lady. — And  how  about  the  Bashi-Bazouks, 
whom  the  General  destroyed  with  your  full  appro- 
bation. 

Politician. — I crave  pardon.  I maintain  that, 
at  the  present  time,  war  has  become  tiseless,  and  the 
General’s  recent  story  is  the  best  illustration  of  this 
truth.  I understand  that  when  one  is  in  duty 
bound  to  participate  in  war  and  one  meets  ir- 
regular Turkish  troops,  guilty  of  outrageous  cruel- 
ties against  peaceful  inhabitants  {he  looks  at  the 
Prince),  then  every  man  not  bound  by  “ absolute 
principles  ” must  destroy  the  transgressors  without 
mercy,  as  the  General  has  done.  He  cannot  then 
think  about  their  moral  regeneration  as  suggested  by 
the  Prince.  But  I beg  leave  to  ask,  firstly,  who  was 
the  real  cause  of  all  these  atrocities,  and,  secondly, 
what  has  been  accomplished  by  armed  intervention  ? 
According  to  my  conscience,  I must  reply  to  the  first 
question  by  merely  exposing  the  bad  military  policy, 
which,  while  exciting  the  passions  and  pretensions 
of  the  Turkish  rajas,  mocked  the  Turks.  It  must 
be  admitted  that  the  Bulgarian  atrocities  only 
commenced  when  Bulgaria  was  infested  with  revolu- 
tionary committees,  and  the  Turks  were  alarmed  by 
the  possibility  of  foreign  intervention  and  the  break- 
ing up  of  Turkey.  The  same  thing  happened  in 
Armenia.  As  regards  the  second  question,  what  was 
achieved  by  intervention  ? The  answer  is  given  by 
the  latest  events  and  is  so  obvious  that  everj- one  can 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


6i 

see  it.  In  1877  our  General  destroys  several  thousand 
Bashi-Bazouks,  saving  ferhafs  thereby  several  hun- 
dred Armenians.  In  1895,  in  the  same  locality,  similar 
Bashi-Bazouks  murder  not  hundreds  but  thousands 
of  the  inhabitants.  If  we  are  to  credit  various  corre- 
spondents (although  I do  not  advise  you  to  believe 
them) , nearly  half  a million  of  men  were  cut  to  pieces. 
Well,  this  may  be  a fable.  However,  in  any  case 
the  Armenian  murders  were  on  a considerably 
greater  scale  than  the  Bulgarian  atrocities.  And 
these  are  the  beneficent  results  of  our  patriotic  and 
philanthropic  wars. 

General. — Who  can  understand  this  ? Here  bad 
politics  are  to  blame  and  there  a patriotic  war.  One 
might  suppose  that  Gorchakof  and  Giers  were 
soldiers,  or  that  Disraeli  and  Bismarck  were  Russian 
patriots  and  philanthropists  ! 

Politician. — Is  it  possible  that  my  statements  are 
not  clear  ? I have  in  view  a definite  connection, 
not  abstract  or  ideal,  but  an  entirely  real,  pragmatic 
connection  between  the  war  of  1877,  which  was 
itself  a result  of  our  bad  politics,  and  of  the  recent 
atrocities  in  Armenia.  You  may  perhaps  be  aware, 
or,  if  not,  it  may  be  useful  for  you  to  know,  what 
happened  after  1878.  Turkey  saw  from  the  treaty 
of  San  Stefano  what  awaited  her  in  the  future  in 
Europe  and  decided  to  guarantee  its  existence  at 
all  events  in  Asia.  First  of  all,  Turkey  made  sure  of 
England’s  support  at  the  Berlin  Congress  ; but  to 
be  on  the  safe  side,  the  Turkish  Government  set 
about  organising  and  strengthening  its  regular  army 
in  Armenia,  i.e.,  increasing  the  number  of  those 


б2 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


“ devils  ” with  whom  the  General  had  to  deal. 
This  proved  to  be  a good  move,  because  some  fifteen 
years  after  Disraeli  had  guaranteed  to  Turkey  the 
possession  of  its  Asiatic  dominions^  in  exchange 
for  the  cession  of  Cyprus,  circumstances  changed. 
English  policy  became  anti-Turkish  and  pro- Arme- 
nian ; English  agitators  appeared  in  Armenia,  just 
as  formerly  Slavophil  agitators  had  penetrated  into 
Bulgaria.  It  was  then  that  those  “ devils,”  as  the 
General  calls  them,  became  the  men  of  the  situation 
and  devoured  the  lion’s  share  of  Christian  flesh. 

General. — I cannot  listen  to  you  saying  such 
things ! What  war  was  to  blame  in  this  case  ? 
Fear  God,  my  friend.  If  in  1878  statesmen  had 
accomplished  their  work  as  satisfactorily  as  the 
soldiers  did  theirs,  there  would  have  been  no  ques- 
tion of  strengthening  and  organising  Turkish  irregular 
troops  in  Armenia,  and  consequently  no  atrocities 
would  have  been  perpetrated. 

Politician. — That  means,  you  suggest,  the  final 
destruction  of  the  Turkish  Empire  ? 

General. — Yes  ! Although  I like  and  respect 
the  Turks  with  all  my  heart,  especially  when  I com- 
pare them  with  all  the  mongrel  Ethiopians.  At  the 
same  time  I think  it  is  necessary  to  make  an  end 
of  the  Turkish  Empire. 

Politician. — I also  should  have  nothing  against 
this,  provided  your  so-called  Ethiopians  could 
organise  some  kind  of  an  empire  of  their  own.  The 
fact  is,  they  only  know  how  to  fight  among  them- 

* On  the  understanding  that  reforms  should  be  introduced 
in  Armenia,  which  Turkey  did  not  do. 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


63 

selves,  and  the  Turkish  Government  is  as  indispen- 
sable for  them  as  the  presence  of  Turkish  troops  is 
necessary  in  Jerusalem  for  the  maintenance  of  the 
peace  and  well-being  of  the  Christian  sects. 

Lady. — I quite  expected  that  you  were  prepared  to 
give  Our  Lord’s  Sepulchre  to  the  Turks. 

Politician. — And  you  probably  think  that  such 
is  the  case  in  consequence  of  my  being  godless  or 
callous  ? Meanwhile  in  reality  I desire  to  retain  the 
Turks  in  Jerusalem  in  consequence  of  the  small  but 
inextinguishable  spark  of  religious  sentiment  which 
remains  in  me  from  my  childhood.  I know  to  a 
certainty  that  when  the  Turkish  soldiers  are  re- 
moved from  Jerusalem,  the  Christians  there  will 
murder  each  other  even  before  the  Holy  Sanctuary 
is  destroyed.  In  case  my  impressions  and  con- 
clusions strike  you  as  suspicious,  ask  some  pilgrims 
whom  you  can  trust,  or,  what  is  better  still,  go  there 
yourself  and  see  things  with  your  own  eyes. 

Lady. — Goto  Jerusalem?  Certainly  not  ! What 
more  could  I see  by  going  there  myself  ? No,  I 
am  afraid  ! 

Politician. — Now  we  have  the  reason. 

Lady. — How  strange.  You  disagree  with  the 
General,  but  both  of  you  praise  the  Turks. 

Politician. — The  General  probably  values  them 
as  good  soldiers,  whereas  I approve  of  them  as  the 
guardians  of  peace  and  order  in  the  East. 

Lady. — Fine  peace  and  order — to  murder  tens 
of  thousands  of  people ! Better  tolerate  dis- 
order. 

Politician. — As  I have  already  explained,  the 


б4 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


slaughter  was  provoked  by  revolutionary  agitation. 
Why  should  one  demand  from  the  Turks  the  ele- 
vated Christian  sentiments  of  charity  and  mercy 
which  are  not  demanded  from  any  other  nations,  be  it 
even  Christians  ? Please  name  any  country  where 
an  armed  rising  has  been  quelled  without  cruel  and 
arbitrary  measures.  I am  ready  to  admit  that  the 
Turkish  Government  overdid  it,  like  Ivan  IV.,  when 
he  drowned  ten  thousand  peaceful  citizens  of  Nov- 
gorod, or  as  the  commissaries  of  the  French  Conven- 
tion with  their  noyades  and  fusillades  or  as  the  Eng- 
lish in  India  when  they  crushed  the  mutiny  in  1857. 
AU  the  same,  there  is  no  doubt,  if  the  various  co- 
religionaries  and  Ethiopians,  as  the  General  terms 
them,  were  left  to  their  own  devices,  there  would  be 
more  carnage  than  under  Turkish  rule. 

General. — But  do  I suggest  to  put  the  Ethio- 
pians in  the  place  of  the  Turks  ? The  matter  is 
simple  ; we  should  take  Constantinople  and  Jeru- 
salem and  make  them  Russian  provinces,  under 
military  rule,  as  in  Samarkand  or  Ashabad.  The 
Turks,  when  they  lay  down  their  arms,  might  be 
satisfied  and  indemnified  as  regards  their  religion 
and  in  other  respects. 

Politician. — Well,  I trust  you  are  not  speaking 
seriously,  otherwise  I should  have  reason  to  doubt 
. . . your  patriotism.  If  we  had  begun  the  war 
with  similar  radical  intentions  it  \vould  probably 
have  again  provoked  a European  conflict.  Ulti- 
mately your  Ethiopians  would  have  joined  the  hostile 
coalition  in  order  to  obtain  their  emancipation. 
They  understand  very  well  that  under  Russian  rule 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


65 


they  would  not  be  very  free  to  show  " their  national 
physiognomy,”  as  the  Bulgarians  say.  Instead  of 
the  destruction  of  Turkey  another  sack  of  Sevas- 
topol, en  grand,  would  be  repeated.  Although  we 
have  often  been  guilty  of  political  incompetence,  I 
am  sure  thut  such  madness  as  a new  war  with  Turkey 
will  not  occur.  But  if  it  did  happen,  every  patriot 
would  have  to  cry  out  in  despair  about  Russia  : 
quem  Deus  vuU  perdere,  prius  dementat. 

Lady. — Evidently  history  is  not  made  to  your 
liking.  You  are  probably  as  much  for  Austria  as 
for  Turkey  ? 

Politician. — On  that  question  it  is  needless  for 
me  to  expatiate,  because  more  competent  people — 
the  national  leaders  of  Bohemia — have  long  ago 
declared  : “If  Austria  had  not  existed  it  would  have 
been  necessary  to  invent  her.”  The  recent  parlia- 
mentary conflicts  in  Vienna  serve  as  good  iflustra- 
tions  of  this  aphorism,  and  present  a picture  in 
miniature  of  what  would  happen  in  those  countries 
on  the  disappearance  of  the  Hapsburg  dynasty. 

Lady.— And  what  have  you  to  say  about  the 
Franco-Russian  alliance  ? Somehow,  you  appear  to 
be  reticent  on  that  score. 

Politician. — Yes,  I do  not  intend  now  to  enter 
into  the  details  of  that  delicate  question.  In  general 
I may  say  that  a rapprochement  with  a progressive 
and  wealthy  nation  like  France  is  in  every  case  to 
our  interest.  Besides,  this  alliance  is  an  alliance  of 
peace  and  a precaution — thus,  at  least,  it  is  con- 
sidered in  high  quarters,  where  it  was  concluded  and 
is  maintained. 


w.c. 


F 


66 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


Mr.  Z.  — The  question  of  moral  and  cultural  ad- 
vantages emanating  from  the  rapprochement  of  the 
two  nations  is  a complicated  matter  and  is  not  clear 
to  me.  But  in  joining  one  of  the  two  inimical  camps 
on  the  continent  of  Europe,  do  we  not  lose  politi- 
cally the  advantage  of  our  independent  position  as 
possible  arbiters  ? By  joining  one  side  we  equalise 
the  relative  strength  of  both  coalitions,  but  do  we 
not  thereby  create  the  possibility  of  a military  colli- 
sion ? France  by  herself  could  not  fight  against  the 
Triple  Alliance,  but  with  Russia’s  aid  she  might. 

Politician. — What  you  observe  would  be  per- 
fectly correct  if  somebody  was  interested  to  kindle  a 
European  war,  but  nobody  desires  to  do  that.  And 
in  any  case  it  is  much  easier  for  Russia  to  confirm 
France  in  the  way  of  peace  than  it  would  be  for 
France  to  entice  Russia  into  war.  Both  restraint  of 
France  and  temptation  of  us  are  undesirable.  It 
is,  however,  most  satisfactory  that  contemporary 
nations  not  only  do  not  desire  war,  but  are  forget- 
ting how  to  fight. 

Take  the  latest  collision,  the  Spanish-American 
war.  Well,  what  kind  of  a war  was  that  ? A doU’s 
comedy,  a fight  in  a Punch  and  Judy  show  ! “ After 

a protracted  and  murderous  war  the  enemy  fell  back, 
having  had  one  man  killed  and  two  wounded. 
We  had  no  losses.”  Or  again  : ” The  whole  of  the 
enemy’s  fleet,  after  desperate  opposition,  surrendered 
unconditionally  to  our  cruiser.  ‘ Money  enough.’ 
There  were  no  casualties  on  either  side.”  The  whole 
war  appears  to  have  been  carried  on  on  similar 
lines.  I am  astonished  that  people  are  not  more 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


67 


struck  by  this  new  character  of  war,  by  its  bloodless 
nature.  This  transformation  came  about  under 
our  very  eyes.  We  all  remember  what  bulletins 
were  issued  in  1870  and  1877. 

General.- — Don’t  anticipate  events,  for  when  two 
really  military  nations  come  into  collision  you  will 
soon  see  what  bulletins  will  be  issued. 

Politician. — I don’t  think  so.  It  is  not  long 
since  Spain  was  a first-class  military  nation.  It 
strikes  me  that  in  humanity,  as  in  the  human  body, 
organs  which  are  not  wanted  become  atrophied  ; 
military  qualities  are  not  wanted,  so  they  begin  to 
disappear.  And  if  they  were  to  reappear,  I should 
be  as  much  astonished  as  to  see  a bat  with  eagle’s 
eyes  or  men  with  tails. 

Lady. — And  how  is  it  that  you  have  been  praising 
Turkish  soldiers  ? 

Politician.— I praised  them  as  guardians  of  inter- 
nal order  in  a State.  In  that  sense  military  power  or, 
as  it  is  styled,  the  “ military  hand,”  manus  militaris, 
will  long  be  needed,  but  that  is  no  impediment  to 
the  disappearance  of  militarism. 

The  desire  and  means  for  carrying  on  inter- 
national wars,  the  outcome  of  national  pugnacity, 
is  disappearing.  It  degenerates  into  parliamentary 
wrangles.  Such  a state  of  things  will  probably 
continue  as  long  as  opposing  parties  and  opinions 
exist.  To  control  them  the  manus  militaris  is 
indispensable,  even  when  wars — international  or 
internecine — are  merely  an  historical  reminiscence. 

General. — What  you  say  means  that  you  com- 
pare the  police  to  the  coccyx  which  remains  in  man 


68 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


after  his  legendary  tail  has  disappeared.  That  may 
be  witty,  but  are  you  not  too  hasty  in  comparing 
us  soldiers  to  the  vanished  tail  ? Because  some 
nations  have  degenerated  and  have  lost  their  prowess, 
is  that  a proof  that  military  instincts  have  disap- 
peared from  the  whole  world  ? Perhaps  by  some  of 
your  “ measures  ” and  “ systems  ” the  Russian  sol- 
dier might  be  converted  into  a jelly,  but  I venture 
to  think  that  God  Almighty  will  spare  us. 

Lady  {turning  to  Politician). — But  you  have  not 
explained  by  what  means,  without  war,  historical 
questions,  like  the  Eastern,  are  to  be  settled  ! If 
Eastern  Christians  seeking  independence  are  slaugh- 
tered by  Turks,  are  we  to  look  on  with  folded  hands  ? 
Admitting  that  you  justly  criticised  former  wars,  I 
will  repeat  the  words  of  the  Prince,  although  not  in 
the  same  sense  as  he  used  them  ; WTiat  are  we  to  do 
if  atrocities  recommence  ? 

Politician. — We  must  collect  our  vats  before 
these  atrocities  begin,  and  instead  of  our  bad  policy 
adopt  a good  one,  be  it  even  German  : not  pro- 
voking the  Turks,  and  not  shouting  in  an  inebriated 
condition  that  the  Cross  must  be  replaced  on  St. 
Sophia. 

For  our  mutual  interest  we  should  conciliate 
Turkey  in  a quiet  and  friendly  manner.  It  rests 
with  us  to  convince  the  Turks  that  slaughtering 
the  population  is  not  only  a bad  but  a very  unprofit- 
able operation. 

Mr.  Z. — In  such  admonitions,  combined  with 
railway  concessions  and  other  commercial  and  indus- 
trial enterprises,  the  Germans  will  be  sure  to  antici- 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY  69 

pate  us,  and  to  vie  with  them  would  be  hope- 
less.^ 

Politician. — There  is  no  question  of  vying  ! If 
some  one  else  takes  on  heavy  work  instead  of  me, 
surely  it  is  only  for  me  to  rejoice  and  be  grateful. 
But  if,  on  the  contrary,  I am  angry  because  he  did  it 
and  not  I,  such  anger  would  be  unworthy  of  a true 
man.  It  would  be  equally  unworthy  for  a nation  like 
Russia  to  be  the  dog  in  the  manger.  If  others  can 
accomplish  the  good  work  quicker  and  better  than  we 
can,  it  would  be  to  our  advantage.  I ask  you,  why 
did  we  wage  war  against  Turkey  in  the  nineteenth 
century  if  not  to  protect  the  rights  of  Turkish 
Christians  ? And  what  does  it  signify  if  the  Ger- 
mans attain  the  same  object  by  peaceful  means,  by 
culture  ? If  in  1895  the  Germans  had  been  as 
firmly  established  in  Asiatic  Turkey  as  the  English 
in  Egypt  there  would  certainly  have  been  no  com- 
plaints about  Armenian  atrocities. 

Lady.— So  you  also  want  to  put  an  end  to  Tur- 
key, but  you  somehow  desire  that  it  should  be 
Germany  who  should  devour  her  ? 

Politician. — I admire  the  wisdom  of  German 
policy,  for  the  very  reason  that  it  does  not  want  to 
devour  indigestible  objects.  Germany’s  policy  is 
more  artful : to  introduce  Turkey  into  the  concert  of 
civilised  nations  and  to  assist  the  Turks  to  educate 
themselves.  This  modus  operandi  would  enable  them 

1 These  words,  written  by  me  in  October,  1899,  were  con- 
firmed a month  later  by  the  German-Turkish  convention 
concerning  matters  in  Asia  Minor  and  the  Bagdad  railway. 
— V.  S. 


70 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


to  govern  justly  and  humanely  those  nationalities 
which,  in  consequence  of  their  mutual  antagonism, 
cannot  manage  their  own  affairs  in  a peaceful  manner. 

Lady. — You  are  quite  a story  teller  ! Is  it  pos- 
sible to  put  a Christian  nation  under  Turkish  rule 
for  all  time  ? I admire  the  Turks  in  many  respects  ; 
but  all  the  same,  they  are  barbarians,  and  their  last 
word  will  always  be  brute  force.  European  civili- 
sation will  only  make  them  worse. 

Politician. — The  same  and  even  more  might  have 
been  said  about  Russia  under  Peter  the  Great.  We 
remember  “ Turkish  atrocities,”  but  was  it  long 
ago  that  in  Russia  and  in  other  countries  atrocities 
disappeared  ? ” Miserable  Christians  groaning  under 
the  Mussulman  yoke.”  And  is  it  long  since  Chris- 
tians, not  pagans,  in  Russia  groaned  under  the  yoke 
of  bad  serf  owners  ? YTat  about  those  лѵЬо  in 
those  days  suffered  cruel  corporal  punishment  ? 
Still,  a fair  answer  to  these  groans  of  Russian 
Christians  was  the  abolition  of  serfdom  and  of  bar- 
barous corporal  punishment,  and  not  the  destruction 
of  Russia.  Why,  therefore,  should  the  reply  to 
Bulgarian  and  Armenian  atrocities  be  necessarily 
the  destruction  of  Turkey,  where  these  groans  are 
heard  but  may  be  prevented  ? 

Lady. — It  is  not  the  same  thing  when  disorders 
take  place  in  Christian  countries,  where  they  can 
easily  be  set  right,  as  when  a Christian  nation  is 
oppressed  by  non-Christians. 

Politician. — The  alleged  impossibility  of  reor- 
ganising Turkey  is  merely  hostile  prejudice,  as  the 
Germans  have  proved.  They  also  helped  to  dispel  the 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


71 


prejudice  that  the  Russians  were  by  nature  barba- 
rians. As  regards  your  Christians  and  non-Christians 
the  victims  of  various  brutalities — la  question  manque 
d’inUrU.  If  a man  tries  to  murder  me,  I do  not  say, 
my  dear  sir,  what  is  your  religion  ? And  it  would 
be  no  consolation  to  me  if  the  murderers  were  Chris- 
tians who  broke  God’s  laws.  Is  it  not  evident  that 
the  Christianity  of  Ivan  IV.,  or  of  the  woman  Solti- 
kova,  or  of  Arakcheef  is  no  advantage,  and  that 
their  life  is  characterised  by  wickedness  which  in 
other  religions  would  be  almost  impossible  ? Yester- 
day the  General  spoke  about  the  crimes  of  the  wild 
Kurds,  and  mentioned,  in  passing,  their  devil-wor- 
ship. Certainly  it  is  very  wicked  to  roast  infants  and 
grown-up  persons  on  a slow  fire,  and  I am  prepared 
to  call  such  deeds  devilish.  It  is,  however,  well 
known  that  Ivan  IV.  had  a partiality  for  roasting 
people  on  slow  fires,  and  that  he  even  stirred  the 
coals  with  his  staff.  And  he  was  not  a barbarian  nor 
a devil-worshipper,  but  an  intellectual  and  learned 
man  of  his  generation.  What  is  more,  he  was  versed 
in  Holy  Writ  and  in  the  tenets  of  Orthodoxy.  But 
are  not  the  Bulgarian  Stambulov,  or  the  Serbian 
Milan,  rather  Turks  than  representatives  of  so-called 
Christian  nations  ? It  would  appear  that  your 
" Christianity  ” is  an  empty  word. 

Lady.— Such  judgment  would  come  naturally 
from  the  Prince. 

Politician. — When  it  is  a question  of  a self- 
evident  truth  I am  not  only  in  sympathy  with  our 
highly-respected  Prince  but  even  with  Balaam’s  ass. 

Mr.  Z. — Your  Excellency  in  kindly  taking  a 


72 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


leading  part  in  our  conversation  did  not,  I presume, 
entertain  the  intention  of  discussing  Christianity 
or  Biblical  animals.  Even  at  the  present  moment 
there  stiU  sounds  in  my  ear  your  heart’s  cry  of  yester- 
day : “ Only  less  religion,  for  God’s  sake  ! ” That 
being  so,  would  you  kindly  return  to  the  subject 
and  solve  my  difficulty  ? You  justly  observed  that 
we  must  not  destroy  the  Turkish  Empire,  but 
civilise  it.  You  also  stated  that  Germany  is  much 
more  fitted  to  civilise  the  Turks  than  we  are.  In 
that  case,  what  is  our  Russian  function  in  the  Eastern 
Question  ? 

Politician. — In  what?  I should  have  thought 
it  was  clear,  we  have  no  function.  Under  the  title 
of  a special  function  of  Russian  policy  you,  of  course, 
understand  that  Russia  should  herself  solve  the  pro- 
blem, in  opposition  to  the  aspirations  of  aU  the  other 
European  nations.  But  I may  tell  you  that  such  a 
policy  has  never  existed.  We  have  deviated,  for 
instance,  in  the  fifties  and  the  seventies,  from  this 
plan,  but  those  sad  deviations  are  precisely  what  I 
term  bad  politics,  unpleasant  results. 

Speaking  in  general,  Russian  policy  in  the 
Eastern  Question  cannot  be  considered  personal  or 
isolated.  Her  problem,  from  the  sixteenth  and  even 
to  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century,  consisted  in 
protecting  the  civilised  world,  conjointly  vith 
Poland  and  Austria,  from  the  threatened  Turkish 
invasion.  This  defensive  measure  (even  without 
a formal  alliance)  rendered  it  necessary  to  act 
together  with  the  Poles,  the  Austrians  and  the 
Venetian  Repubhc.  It  was  a general  policy  and 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


73 


not  the  policy  of  any  single  State.  At  the  present 
time  this  general  agreement  remains  unchanged, 
although  the  aim  and  means  of  action  have  had  to 
be  altered.  Now,  it  is  not  a question  of  protecting 
Europe  against  Turkish  barbarity,  but  of  converting 
Turkey  into  a European  State.  To  attain  the  former 
object  military  action  was  required,  but  now  peaceful 
measures  are  wanted.  But  in  all  cases  the  problem 
remains  the  same.  Formerly  there  was  solidarity 
among  the  European  nations  in  military  defence, 
now  there  is  solidarity  in  spreading  civilisation  and 
culture. 

General. — However,  the  former  military  soli- 
darity in  Europe  did  not  prevent  Richelieu  and 
Louis  XIV.  from  concluding  an  alliance  with 
Turkey  against  the  Hapsburgs. 

Politician. — It  was  a bad  Bourbon  policy, 
which,  combined  with  their  foolish  internal  politics, 
was  condemned,  as  it  deserved,  by  history. 

Lady. — You  call  it  history  : I believe  it  used  to 
be  termed  regicide. 

Mr.  Z. — But  that  exactly  means  wicked  history. 

Politician  {turning  to  the  Lady). — ^The  fact  is 
that  no  political  mistake  remains  unpunished. 
Those  who  like  may  discover  something  mystical 
in  it,  but  I see  nothing  of  the  kind.  If  I were  to  give 
up  soured  milk,  which  suits  me  now,  and  went  in  for 
champagne  as  before,  the  ancien  regime  would  kill 
me  as  it  did  the  Bourbons. 

Lady. — But  you  will  agree  that  your  soured  milk 
policy  becomes  as  wearisome  as  the  Bourbons. 

Politician  {offended). — If  I were  not  interrupted. 


74 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


I would  long  ago  have  exhausted  the  question  and 
made  room  for  a more  entertaining  speaker. 

Lady. — Well,  well,  don’t  be  offended.  I was  only 
joking.  On  the  contrary,  in  my  opinion  you  are 
very  witty — for  your  age  and  position. 

Politician. — I was  saying,  we  are  now  in  agree- 
ment with  the  rest  of  Europe  as  regards  the  cul- 
tural transformation  of  Turkey,  and  that  we  have 
not,  and  need  not  have,  any  special  pohcy  of  our 
own.  We  must,  however,  admit  that  in  consequence 
of  our  general  backwardness,  the  share  of  Russia  in 
civilising  Turkey  has  so  far  not  been  considerable. 
Our  reputation  as  a first-class  military  Powder  cannot 
exactly  be  maintained  for  the  present.  Things 
cannot  be  got  for  nothing,  they  must  be  earned. 
We  attained  our  military  importance,  not  by  words 
but  by  real  campaigns  and  battles.  In  the  same  way 
we  must  win  our  cultural  importance  by  labours  and 
victories  in  peaceful  pursuits.  If  the  Turks  sub- 
mitted to  our  force  of  arms,  they  wiU  certainly 
submit,  in  the  matter  of  civilisation,  to  those  who  are 
most  powerful  in  the  art  of  culture.  Wdiat  ought  we 
to  do  ? That  imaginary  Cross  on  St.  Sophia  which 
we  raised  in  opposition  to  the  real,  substantial 
labours  of  the  Germans  will  scarcely  give  us  the  pre- 
eminence at  Constantinople. 

General. — The  point  is  that  the  Cross  should 
not  be  imaginary. 

Politician. — Then  what  is  to  materialise  the 
Cross  ? Until  you  discover  such  a medium  the  only 
thing  required  to  soothe  our  self-love  is  to  increase 
our  ehorts  in  order  to  reach  the  civilisation  of  more 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


75 


cultured  nations  instead  of  wasting  our  time  on 
Slav  committees  and  other  pernicious  nonsense. 
Besides,  if  it  is  impossible  in  Turkey,  we  can  still 
play  an  important  part  in  civilising  Central  Asia 
and  the  Far  East,  whither,  it  would  appear,  uni- 
versal history  is  transferring  its  centre  of  gravity. 
In  consequence  of  geographical  and  other  conditions, 
Russia  can  there  achieve  more  than  all  the  other 
Powers,  with  the  exception,  of  course,  of  England. 

The  object  of  our  policy  in  that  connection 
should,  therefore,  consist  in  constant  and  friendly 
agreements  with  the  English,  so  that  our 
civilising  co-operation  with  them  should  never 
degenerate  into  senseless  quarrels  and  unworthy 
rivalry. 

Mr.  Z. — Unfortunately  similar  transformations 
among  men  as  well  as  in  nations  are  only  brought 
about,  as  it  were,  by  fate. 

Politician. — Yes,  that  is  how  it  happens.  How- 
ever, neither  in  the  life  of  men  nor  of  nations  do 
I know  a single  example  where  enmity  between 
peoples  engaged  in  the  same  work  made  any 
one  stronger,  richer  or  happier.  This  universal 
experience  is  taken  into  consideration  by  wise 
people,  and  I think  that  quick-witted  Russians 
will  not  fail  to  avail  themselves  of  it  ultimately.  To 
quarrel  with  the  English  in  the  Far  East  would  be 
the  height  of  foolishness,  to  say  nothing  of  the 
impropriety  of  exposing  our  own  differences  to 
strangers.  But  perhaps  we  are  more  nearly  related 
to  yellow-faced  Chinamen  than  to  the  countrymen 
of  Shakespeare  and  Byron  ? 


7б 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


Mr.  Z. — That  is  a delicate  matter. 

Politician. — Let  us  put  it  aside  for  the  present 
and  turn  to  another  question.  Will  you  adopt  my 
point  of  view  and  admit  that  at  present  the  policy 
of  Russia  can  have  only  two  objects  ? First,  the 
maintenance  of  European  peace,  since  every 
European  war  in  the  present  state  of  historical 
development  must  be  a useless  and  vdcked  civil  war. 
And  second,  the  exercise  of  civilising  authority 
on  barbarous  nations  which  are  in  our  sphere  of 
influence. 

Both  these  objects,  independently  of  their 
intrinsic  worth,  support  and  guarantee  each  other’s 
existence.  While  working  to  civilise  barbarous 
countries,  which  is  for  the  interest  of  all  Europe,  we 
draw  more  closely  the  bonds  of  union  between  our- 
selves and  other  European  nations. 

The  confirmation  of  European  unity,  in  its  turn, 
strengthens  our  influence  on  barbarous  nations,  de- 
priving them  of  the  thought  of  opposition.  If  the 
yellow  race  knew  that  Russia  was  backed  by  Europe, 
our  progress  in  Asia  would  meet  ^\dth  no  obstacles. 
In  the  contrary  case  the  yellow  race  might  be  inclined 
to  attack  our  frontier,  and  we  would  have  to  protect 
ourselves  on  two  fronts,  extending  to  some  ten 
thousand  versts.  I do  not  believe  in  the  bogey  of 
Mongolian  invasion,  because  I do  not  admit  the 
possibility  of  European  war,  othei^vise  we  might 
fear  the  Mongols. 

General. — You  consider  a European  war  and  an 
invasion  of  Mongols  improbable,  yet  I fear  that 
your  “ solidarity  ” of  the  European  nations  and 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


77 


the  advent  of  universal  peace  are  also  improbable. 
It  appears  somehow  unnatural  and  improbable. 
There  is  good  reason  for  singing  in  churches  on 
Christmas-day,  “ Peace  on  earth  and  goodwill 
towards  men.”  That  means  that  there  will  be  peace 
on  earth  only  when  there  is  goodwill  among  men. 
But  when  will  that  be  ? Have  you  seen  it  ? To  tell 
the  truth,  the  only  State  in  Europe  that  you  and  I 
feel  friendly  towards  is  the  Principality  of  Monaco. 
We  are  always  at  peace  with  that  State.  But  close 
friendship  with  the  Germans  and  the  English  and 
” solidarity  ” with  them,  as  you  call  it,  will  never 
be  realised. 

Politician. — How  do  you  mean  it  will  never  be 
realised  ; it  is  already  realised,  in  the  natural  order 
of  things.  We  are  in  ” solidarity  ” with  Europeans 
for  the  very  simple  reason  that  we  are  Europeans. 
Since  the  eighteenth  century  it  has  been  un  fait 
accompli,  and  neither  the  barbarity  of  the  masses 
of  the  Russian  people  nor  the  wild  dreams  of  the 
Slavophils  can  change  it. 

General. — But  is  there  solidarity  among  them- 
selves, for  instance  between  Germans,  French  and 
English  ? We  learn  that  even  the  Swedes  and 
Norwegians  have  lost  their  solidarity. 

Politician. — The  argument  rests  on  a false  basis, 
for  the  historical  situation  has  been  lost  sight  of. 
Did  solidarity  exist  between  Moscow  and  Novgorod 
in  the  time  of  Ivan  III.  and  Ivan  IV.  ? Why  should 
you  then  not  admit  the  existence  of  the  present 
solidarity  of  the  provinces  of  Moscow  and  Novgorod 
in  the  general  interests  of  Russia  ? 


78 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


General. — All  I say  is,  delay  proclaiming  your- 
selves Europeans  until  the  European  nations  form  a 
family,  welded  together  as  are  the  component  parts 
of  the  Russian  Empire.  Are  we  to  break  up  our  own 
solidarity  and  join  the  Europeans,  who  are  at 
daggers  drawn  among  themselves  ? 

Politician. — At  daggers  drawn  is  a strong  ex- 
pression. You  may  rest  in  hope.  Not  only  Sweden 
and  Norway,  but  neither  Germany  nor  France  will 
break  up ; they  will  foresee  and  prevent  rupture. 
The  small  group  of  Russian  adventurers  who  back 
France  against  Germany  ought  to  be  shut  up  in  a 
fortress,  to  develop  there  their  patriotism  and  to 
preach  war  against  Germany. 

Lady. — How  fine  it  would  be  if  all  national 
enmity  could  be  locked  up  in  a fortress ! But  I 
think  you  are  mistaken. 

Politician. — Well,  of  course,  I spoke  cum  grano 
salts.  No  doubt  Europe  is  not  entirely  united,  but  I 
still  maintain  my  historical  analogy. 

As  it  was  in  Russia  in  the  sixteenth  century,  so  it 
is  now  in  Europe.  Separatism  existed,  but  was  then 
at  its  last  gasp  ; Imperial  unity  was  no  more  a 
dream,  but  was  being  moulded  into  a definite  form. 
National  antagonism  was  still  extant,  especially 
among  the  uneducated  masses  and  politicians,  but  it 
lacked  the  power  to  act.  A European  war  could  not 
be  provoked.  As  regards  the  benevolent  sentiments 
to  which  the  General  referred,  I have  seldom  seen 
them  among  nations  or  peoples  composing  a nation, 
or  even  in  private  families.  Every  one  for  himself. 
What  deductions  are  we  therefore  to  make  ? There 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


79 


is  no  cause  for  civil  wars  and  fratricide.  It  does  not 
matter  if  Germans  and  Frenchmen  are  not  partial 
to  each  other,  provided  there  is  no  war.  I am  con- 
vinced that  there  will  be  none. 

Mr.  Z. — That  is  very  probable.  But  even  if 
we  consider  Europe  as  one  and  indivisible,  it  in 
no  wise  follows  that  we  are  Europeans.  You  know 
that  for  more  than  ten  years  there  has  been  a 
notion  that  the  German-Romanic  nations  have 
unity  in  their  cultural  historical  type,  but  that  we 
Russians  form  a separate  Greco-Slavonic  type. 

Politician. — I have  heard  about  this  variety  of 
Slavophilism  and  have  even  conversed  with  its 
votaries.  What  I then  noticed  enabled  me  to  solve 
this  question.  The  fact  of  the  matter  is  that  not 
all  those  gentlemen  who  cry  out  against  Europe 
and  our  European  notions  can  adhere  to  the  views 
adopted  by  our  Greco-Slavonic  Church.  They  are 
invariably  carried  away  by  the  teaching  of  Con- 
fucius, Buddha,  Tibet  Lamas  and  all  manner  of  Indo- 
Mongolian  Orientalism.  Their  estrangement  from 
Europe  is  as  great  as  their  gravitation  towards  Asia. 
What  does  that  mean  ? Let  us  admit  that  they  are 
right  as  regards  Europe,  that  it  is  a great  delusion. 
But  why  are  they  so  fatally  carried  away  by  the 
other  extreme — by  this  Asiatic  propaganda  ? And 
where  have  their  Greco-Slavonic  and  Orthodox  ideas 
disappeared  ? For  in  them  was  the  pith  of  the 
matter.  Drive  out  Nature  by  the  door  and  it 
gets  in  by  the  window.  In  this  instance  Nature  has 
no  self-existent  Greco-Slavonic,  cultural,  historical 
type,  but  was  and  is  Russia,  a great  frontier 


8o 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


country  between  Europe  and  Asia.  Being  a border- 
land, our  country  is  naturally  more  influenced  by  the 
Asiatic  element  than  other  European  States.  Herein 
lies  the  imaginary  idea  of  our  Slav  self-existence. 
Even  Byzantium  has  no  inherent  nationality  of  its 
own,  but  appeared  original  merely  from  its  Asiatic 
admixture.  In  our  case,  from  early  days,  and 
especially  from  the  time  of  Baty,  the  Asiatic  element 
became  a second  nature  and  animated  the  Russian 
spirit,  so  much  so  that  the  Germans  were  able  to  say 
about  us,  although  not  without  a sigh  : 

“ Zwei  Seelen  wohnen,  Ach  ! in  ihrer  Brust 
Die  eine  will  sich  von  der  andern  trennen.” 

To  free  ourselves  from  our  Oriental  spirit  is  im- 
possible and  unnecessary,  but  we  must  give  the 
preference  to  the  better  and  higher  spirit,  which  is 
more  favourable  to  progress  and  richer  in  possibihties. 
That  is  what  we  did  under  Peter  the  Great.  But 
our  relationship  with  Asia  stiU  gave  rise  in  some 
minds  to  chimerical  notions  advocating  the  sub- 
version of  a great  historical  question,  which  had  been 
finally  settled.  Hence  Slavophihsm,  i.e.,  a theory 
of  our  original,  self-existent,  historical  culture,  and 
so  forth.  In  reahty  we  are  unavoidably  Europeans, 
only  with  Asiatic  characteristics  of  mind.  This  is, 
so  to  speak,  grammatically  self-evident.  Yfliat  is 
Russian  in  a grammatical  sense  ? It  is  an  adjective ; 
and  what  substantive  does  this  adjective  quahfy  ? 

Lady. — I suppose  the  noun  man : Russian  man, 
Russian  people. 

Politician. — No.  It  is  too  broad  and  indefinite, 
for  even  Papuans  and  Esquimos  are  men,  and  have 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


8i 


I,  as  a man  and  a noun,  anything  in  common  with 
Papuans  and  Esquimos  ? 

Lady. — Nevertheless,  some  very  important  things 
are  common  to  aU  people  ; for  instance,  love. 

Politician. — That  is  still  wider.  How  can  I 
admit  love  as  my  specific  attribute,  when  I know  that 
it  is  also  natural  to  all  animals  and  other  living 
creatures  ? 

Mr.  Z. — It  is  a complicated  affair.  I,  for  one,  am  a 
gentle  man,  and  therefore  in  love  affairs  I am  more 
in  solidarity  with  a white  or  a blue  dove  than  with 
the  Moor,  Othello,  although  he  is  also  called  a man. 

General. — Well,  at  a certain  age  every  reason- 
able man  is  in  solidarity  with  the  white  pigeons. ^ 

Lady. — What  is  that  ? 

General. — It  is  a joke,  not  for  you,  but  for  His 
Excellency  and  your  humble  servant. 

Politician. — Let  us  drop  this.  Treve  de  plai- 
santeries.  We  are  not  on  the  stage  of  the  French 
theatre.  I wished  to  say  that  the  real  substantive 
for  the  adjective  Russian  is  European.  We  are 
Russian  Europeans  just  as  there  are  EngUsh,  French, 
or  German  Europeans.  If  I feel  that  I am  a Euro- 
pean, is  it  not  foolish  to  try  and  prove  that  I am  a 
kind  of  Slavo-Russ  or  Greco-Slav  ? I know  that  I 
am  a European  as  surely  as  I am  a Russian.  I can, 
and  perhaps  I ought,  to  be  kind  and  compassionate 
towards  every  man  as  well  as  to  every  animal, 
because  blessed  is  the  man  who  is  merciful  to  his 
beast.  I cannot,  however,  consider  myself  in 
solidarity  or  close  friendship  with  Zulus  or  China- 
* A certain  Russian  sect. 


W.C. 


G 


82 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


men,  but  only  with  nations  and  peoples  who  have 
created  and  preserved  the  treasures  of  higher 
culture,  which  contribute  to  my  spiritual  nourish- 
ment and  afford  me  supreme  happiness.  Originally 
war  was  a sacred  duty  enabhng  chosen  nations  to 
be  formed  and  consolidated  in  order  to  withstand  the 
lower  elements  of  humanity.  Now  they  have  been 
formed  and  consolidated,  and  they  have  nothing  to 
fear  except  internecine  quarrels.  The  epoch  of 
peace  and  the  spread  of  peaceful  European  culture 
is  now  everywhere  on  the  increase.  All  must  become 
Europeans.  The  ideal  European  should  he  the  ideal 
of  all  humanity,  and  European  culture,  the  aim  of 
all  mankind.  In  this  lies  the  meaning  of  history. 
At  first  there  were  only  Greek  and  Roman  Europeans. 
Next  appeared  others,  some  in  the  West,  some  in  the 
East.  There  were  also  Russian  Europeans.  On 
the  other  side  of  the  ocean  appeared  American 
Europeans,  and  now  we  must  expect  Turkish, 
Persian,  Indian,  Japanese,  and  perhaps  Chinese 
Europeans.  A European  is  at  present  a definite 
mental  conception  which  is  extending  in  every  sense. 
Observe,  however,  the  difference.  Every  man  is 
like  any  other  man.  Therefore,  if  we  accept  this 
abstract  idea  as  our  essential,  we  must  admit  entire 
personal  equality  and  value  the  nation  of  Newdon 
and  Shakespeare  no  higher  than  w^e  value  a nation 
of  Papuans.  But  this  is  ridiculous  and,  in  practice, 
objectionable.  If  my  mental  conception  is  not  a 
man  in  general,  but  one  wEo  spreads  culture — i.e., 
a European — then  the  idea  of  equahty  is  nonsense. 
The  idea  conveyed  by  the  term  European  is  the  same 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY  83 

as  the  idea  conveyed  by  the  word  culture,  which  is  a 
sound  standard  or  measurement  for  the  definition 
of  comparative  worth  or  value  of  different  races, 
nations  and  individuals.  These  different  evalua- 
tions must  be  taken  into  consideration  by  sound 
politicians.  Otherwise,  if  we  place  comparatively 
cultured  Austrians  on  the  same  platform  with  semi- 
barbarous  Herzegovinians,  we  shall  come  to  the  same 
foolish  and  dangerous  speculafions  which  attract 
the  latest  Mohicans  of  our  Slavophilism.  II  у a 
Europeen  et  Europien.  Even  after  the  advent  of 
that  desirable  and,  I trust,  not  far  distant  hour, 
when  Europe,  or  the  cultured  world,  will  really 
embrace  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  terrestrial  globe 
in  a united  and  peaceful  humanity,  there  will  still 
remain  those  natural  gradations  and  shades  of 
culture,  canonised  by  history,  which  are  to  deter- 
mine our  relations  with  different  nationalities.  In 
the  glorious,  all-comprising  kingdom  of  higher  cul- 
ture, just  as  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  there  is  one 
glory  of  the  sun,  another  glory  of  the  moon,  another 
glory  of  the  stars,  one  star  differeth  from  another ; 
such  is,  I believe,  the  teaching  of  our  catechism. 
And  now,  although  the  goal  is  near,  but  not  attained, 
it  is  all  the  more  necessary  to  beware  of  the  error 
of  indiscriminate  equality.  At  present  the  news- 
papers have  been  writing  about  the  quarrel  between 
England  and  the  Transvaal,  and  that  the  African- 
ders even  threaten  England  with  war.  And  I 
foresee  that  some  of  our  journalists  and  politicians, 
and  perhaps  some  on  the  Continent,  will  take  the 
side  of  these,  so-called,  down-trodden  Africanders. 


84 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


Why,  it  would  be  as  if  our  highly-respected  Mr. 
Maartens^  were  to  go  into  a grocer’s  shop  and  be 
attacked  and  ill-treated  by  a vulgar  clerk  on  the  plea 
that  the  shop  was  his  and  not  Mr.  Maartens’.  One 
might  regret  that  Mr.  Maartens  got  into  this  dilemma, 
but  when  he  was  ~once  in  it  I,  for  one,  would  be 
gratified  if  Mr.  Maartens  had  the  clerk  taken  up  by 
the  police  and  relegated  to  a house  of  correction. 
But,  instead  of  that,  various  decently-attired 
gentlemen  commend  the  grocer’s  boy.  “ Such  a 
small  chap,  and  had  the  pluck  to  attack  a tall,  fine 
gentleman.”  If  the  Africander  traders  and  carriers 
had  the  sense  to  declare  themselves  Dutchmen — their 
blood  relations,  they  might  consider  themselves  a 
special  nationality  calculated  to  found  their  own 
African  fatherland.  Oh,  the  rascal ! 

Lady. — In  the  first  place,  don’t  be  abusive ; and 
secondly,  explain  to  me  what  is  this  Transvaal. 
What  kind  of  people  are  the  inhabitants  ? 

Mr.  Z. — The  inhabitants  are  a mixture  of  Euro- 
peans and  niggers.  They  are  neither  white  nor 
black,  but  they  are  Boers. 

Lady. — I presume  that  is  also  a joke. 

Politician. — And  a poor  one. 

Mr.  Z. — The  jokes  are  as  good  as  the  Boers. 
Besides,  if  you  object  to  the  colour,  they  have  also 
an  Orange  State. 

Politician. — Speaking  seriously,  I may  say  that 
these  Boers  are  certainly  Europeans,  but  poor 
specimens.  Separated  from  their  glorious  metro- 

1 The  late  eminent  Russian  jurisconsult  of  International 
Law. 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


85 


polis,  they  have  lost  to  a great  extent  their  culture  ; 
surrounded  by  natives,  they  have  become  uncivilised. 
To  place  them  on  a par  with  the  English,  and  wish 
them  to  be  successful  in  the  struggle  with  England — 
cela  n a pas  de  nom. 

Lady. — But  our  Europeans  sympathised  with  the 
Circassian  mountaineers  when  they  fought  with  us 
for  their  independence,  and  Russia  is  more  cultured 
than  the  Circassians. 

Politician. — In  order  not  to  expatiate  on  the 
causes  of  this  European  sympathy  with  the  Cir- 
cassian barbarians,  I will  merely  observe  that  we 
should  assimilate  the  general  tendency  of  European 
thought,  and  not  the  occasional  foolishness  of  some 
Europeans.  I regret  with  all  my  heart  that  England 
may  have  to  resort  to  such  superannuated  and 
objectionable  means  as  war,  to  pacify  the  pug- 
nacious people  who  have  challenged  her.  Should 
war,  however,  be  unavoidable  in  consequence  of  the 
savagery  of  these  Zulus — I meant  to  say  Boers — 
encouraged  by  the  jealousy  of  the  Continent  against 
England,  I should,  of  course,  sincerely  wish  that  this 
war  might  end  with  the  complete  pacification  of  the 
African  roughs,  so  that  their  independence  should 
be  destroyed  once  for  all.  On  the  other  hand  their 
success,  which  is  not  impossible  as  Africa  is  far  away, 
would  be  the  triumph  of  barbarity  over  civilisation, 
and  for  me,  as  a Russian,  i.e.,  a European,  it  would  be 
a day  of  deep  national  mourning. 

Mr.  Z.  {sotto  voce). — The  statesman  speaks  elo- 
quently, like  that  Frenchman  : ce  sabre  d’honneur 
est  le  plus  beau  jour  de  та  vie. 


86 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


Lady  [to  the  Politician). — No,  I don’t  agree.  And 
why  not  sympathise  with  these  Boers  ? Did  not  we 
sympathise  with  William  Tell  ? 

Politician. — Yes,  if  they  had  created  their  own 
poetical  legend,  inspired  a home-bred  Jean  Jacques 
Rousseau  and  produced  authors  and  scientists,  we 
would  speak  differently  of  them. 

Lady. — But  all  this  civilisation  might  come  later. 
To  begin  with,  the  Swiss  were  likewise  shepherds.  . . . 
And  the  Americans,  when  they  fought  for  their 
independence  against  the  English,  were  not  bereft 
of  civilisation.  Although  not  Boers,  they  tore  off 
the  scalps  of  the  Red  Indians,  as  Mayne  Reid  tells 
us.  Lafayette  also  sympathised  with  them,  and  he 
was  right,  because  they  have  now  joined  all  religions 
together  and  made  an  exhibition  of  them  at  Chicago, 
a thing  which  had  never  been  done  before.  In  Paris 
the  French  wanted  to  do  the  same  thing,  but  nothing 
came  of  it.  An  аЪЫ,  called  Victor  Charbonnel,  was 
also  very  active  about  it.  He  wrote  to  me  several 
times  : a very  sympathetic  man.  But  the  various 
religions  could  not  agree.  Even  the  Chief  Rabbi 
declared  that  “ for  religion  we  have  the  Bible,  and 
an  exhibition  was  out  of  place.”  Poor  Charbonnel 
was  in  such  despair  that  he  abjured  Christ  and 
announced  in  the  newspapers  that  he  had  resigned 
his  living  and  greatly  respected  Renan.  The  end  of 
his  career,  I am  told,  was  not  satisfactory,  for  he 
married,  or  took  to  drink  or  did  something  of  the 
kind.  Next  came  our  Nepluef,  who  finally  lost 
faith  in  all  religions.  He  wrote  to  me  that  he  only 
believed  in  humanity.  He  is  an  idealist.  But  how 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


87 


was  humanity  to  be  represented  at  the  Paris  Exhibi- 
tion ? I think  it  is  all  too  fantastic.  The  Americans 
have,  however,  arranged  matters  very  cleverly. 
Ecclesiastics  representing  all  religions  joined  them. 
A Catholic  bishop  was  elected  president.  He  read 
out  the  Lord’s  Prayer  in  English,  while  the  Buddhist 
and  Chinese  idolatrous  priests  responded  very 
politely ; “ Oh  yes  ! All  right,  sir  ! ^ We  wish  no 
one  evil,  and  we  only  beg  one  thing,  that  your  mis- 
sionaries should  keep  away  from  us.  Your  religion 
is  very  good  for  you,  but  you  do  not  practise  it. 
That  is  not  our  fault,  but  our  religions  are  the  best 
for  us.”  And  so  everything  finished  satisfactorily, 
there  was  no  fighting,  but  much  astonishment. 
Who  knows,  perhaps  these  Africanders  may  become 
Americans. 

Politician. — Certainly,  all  things  are  possible. 
Even  a garroche  may  become  an  eminent  man  of 
science.  But  in  the  meantime,  for  his  own  good  it 
might  be  as  well  to  give  him  a flogging. 

Lady. — What  language  ! Decidement  vous  vous 
encanaillez?  All  this  comes  from  Monte  Carlo. 
Qui  est-ce  que  vous  freq^ientez  Id  has  ? Les  families 
des  croupiers,  sans  doute  ? However,  that  is  your 
business.  I would  only  beg  you  to  curtail  your 
political  wisdom  or  we  shall  be  late  for  dinner.  It 
is  time  to  stop. 

Politician. — My  wish  was  to  sum  up,  to  wind  up 
and  to  connect  the  end  with  the  beginning. 

Lady. — You  will  never  finish.  I must  assist  to 

1 “ Oh  yes  ! All  right,  sir  1 ” in  English  in  the  original 
text. — Ed. 


88 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


explain  your  idea.  You  meant  to  say,  formerly 
there  was  a God  and  there  was  war,  and  that  now 
instead  of  God  we  have  culture  and  peace.  Is 
that  so  ? 

Politician. — Perhaps.  Thereabouts. 

Lady. — That’s  all  right.  What  is  God  ? Although 
I do  not  know  and  cannot  explain,  I feel  He  exists. 
But  as  regards  your  culture,  I feel  nothing.  Explain 
to  me  in  two  words  what  it  is. 

Politician. — Of  what  culture  consists  and  what 
it  contains,  you  know  yourself.  It  is  all  the  treasures 
of  thought  and  genius  which  have  been  created  by 
the  greatest  minds  of  chosen  nations. 

Lady. — That  is  not  one  thing,  but  several  dif- 
ferent things.  Here  is  Voltaire,  Bossuet,  also  the 
Madonna  and  Nana,  and  Alfred  Musset  and  Philaret. 
Are  they  to  form  one  mass,  and  that  mass  to 
replace  God  ? 

Politician. — Yes,  I meant  to  say  that  we  need 
not  trouble  about  culture  in  the  sense  of  an  historical 
depositary  of  treasures.  It  is  created  ; it  exists,  and 
we  thank  God  for  it.  We  might  hope  that  there 
will  be  new  Shakespeares  and  Newtons,  but  that  is 
not  in  our  power  and  is  of  no  practical  interest. 
There  is,  however,  another  practical  or  moral  side 
to  culture.  In  private  life  we  call  it  politeness  or 
courteousness.  This  may  appear  unimportant  to  a 
superficial  observer,  but  it  has  an  immense  and 
exclusive  meaning,  because  it  may  be  universal  and 
obligatory.  One  cannot  demand  exalted  \drtues  or 
genius,  but  one  can  and  must  insist  on  politeness 
from  everybody.  It  is  that  minimum  of  considera- 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


89 


tion  for  others  and  of  morality,  thanks  to  which 
people  can  live  together  as  human  beings.  Certainly, 
politeness  is  not  the  whole  of  culture,  just  as  reading 
and  writing  does  not  exhaust  mental  development, 
but  politeness  is  one  of  its  conditions.  Politeness 
is  culture  a I’usage  de  tout  le  monde.  And  we  see  that 
from  private  relations  it  extends  to  all  social  classes, 
political  and  international.  We  remember  how  in 
our  childhood  people  could  be  rude  and  unrefined, 
but  now  obligatory  and  even  coercive  politeness  has 
extended  its  power,  and  is  reaching  all  classes  and 
countries. 

Lady. — Pray  be  brief.  You  are  trying  to  prove 
that  peaceful  politics  between  States  is  the  same 
thing  as  politeness  between  people. 

Politician. — Certainly.  In  French,  politesse  and 
politique  are  closely  connected.  And  observe,  that 
no  sentiments  or  special  benevolence  are  required  in 
this  case,  as  the  gallant  General  needlessly  observed. 
If  I do  not  assault  a person,  it  does  not  follow  that  I 
am  benevolently  inclined  towards  him.  On  the 
contrary,  I may  harbour  hostile  sentiments  in  my 
heart,  but  as  a cultured  man  I scorn  quarrels.  I also 
realise  that  no  good  can  come  of  fighting.  I there- 
fore treat  the  man  with  politeness,  thereby  losing 
nothing  and  gaining  much.  Just  in  the  same  way, 
whatever  antipathy  may  exist  between  two  more 
or  less  civilised  nations,  they  will  never  resort  to 
des  voies  de  fait — i.e.,  to  war,  for  the  two  following 
reasons.  Firstly,  because  war  is  not  as  repre- 
sented in  poetry  and  in  pictures,  but  as  it 
exists  in  reality.  Dead  bodies,  festering  wounds, 


go 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


a collection  of  coarse  and  dirty  people,  the  inter- 
ruption of  the  natural  course  of  life,  the  destruction 
of  useful  edifices  and  institutions,  of  bridges,  rail- 
roads, telegraphs — all  this  dismal  medley  is  revolting 
to  a cultured  nation  just  as  mangled  bodies  disgust 
us.  Secondly,  a nation  which  has  attained  a certain 
degree  of  intellectual  development  comprehends 
how  advantageous  it  is  to  be  polite  towards  other 
nations,  and  how  unprofitable  it  is  to  fight  with 
them.  There  are  certainly  various  gradations ; 
hitting  with  the  fist  is  more  cultured  than  biting, 
caning  is  more  cultured  than  hitting,  and  a s^un- 
bolic  slap  on  the  face  is  still  more  civilised.  Wars 
can  also  be  waged  in  a more  or  less  barbarous 
manner,  and  the  European  wars  of  the  nineteenth 
century  are  more  like  old-fashioned  duels  between 
respectable  men  than  a stand-up  fight  between  two 
drunken  apprentices.  But  even  this  is  a passing 
phase.  You  may  have  observed  that  among 
advanced  nations  even  duels  are  going  out  of 
fashion.  While  backward  Russia  is  deploring  the 
death  of  her  best  poets  killed  in  duels,  in  more 
civilised  France  duels  have  become  bloodless  com- 
bats, the  remnants  of  a bad  and  defunct  tradition. 
“ Quand  on  esf  mart  c’est  qu’on  nest  plus  en  vie,” 
said  de  la  Palisse,  famous  for  his  truisms.  And 
believe  me  that  you  and  I will  see  duels  and  wars 
buried  in  the  archives  of  history.  Real  culture 
requires  that  all  fighting  between  men  as  well  as 
nations  should  be  abolished.  In  every  case  a peaceful 
policy  is  the  best  criterion  and  ewdence  of  progress 
in  civilisation.  And,  therefore,  with  every  desire  to 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


91 


be  agreeable  to  our  gallant  General,  I still  maintain 
my  statement  that  literary  agitation  against  war  is 
of  good  augur.  It  not  only  prevents,  but  it  also 
hastens  the  final  solution  of  the  problem.  With  all 
its  strange  enthusiasm,  this  propaganda  is  important 
because  it  emphasises  to  the  public  mind  the  great 
fact  of  historical  progress.  A peaceful,  i.e.,  polite, 
all-round  profitable  adjustment  of  all  international 
relations  and  differences  is  the  stable  form  of  sound 
politics  for  civilised  humanity.  {Turning  to  Mr.  Z.) 
You  wish  to  say  something. 

Mr.  Z. — You  lately  said  that  a peaceful  policy  is  a 
symptom  of  progress.  In  that  connection  I remem- 
ber that  in  Turgenyef’s  “Smoke”  somebody  very 
justly  observed  : “ Progress  is  a symptom.”  In 
that  case  would  it  not  follow  that  peaceful  policy  is  a 
symptom  of  a symptom  ? 

Politician. — Yes.  And  what  then  ? Certainly 
everything  is  relative.  But  what  is  your  idea  ? 

Mr.  Z. — Merely  this,  that  if  peaceful  politics  are 
only  the  shadow  of  a shadow,  is  it  worth  talking  so 
much  about  all  this  shadowy  progress  ? Would  it 
not  be  preferable  to  tell  humanity  what  Father 
Varsonovius  said  to  the  religious  lady  : “You  are 
old  and  weak,  and  will  never  be  any  better.” 

Lady. — Now  this  comes  too  late.  {To  the  Poli- 
tician.) Observe  how  your  own  politique-politesse 
mocks  you. 

Politician. — How  is  that  ? 

Lady. — Only  that  you  will  not  go  to-morrow  to 
Monte  Carlo,  euphemistically  called  Nice. 

Politician. — Why  so  ? 


92 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


Lady. — Because  these  gentlemen  wish  to  refute 
you,  but  you  were  so  prolix  that  no  time  is  left  for 
them,  and  their  arguments  will  have  to  be  put  off 
till  to-morrow.  But  is  it  possible  that  while  cultured 
people  will  be  contradicting  your  theses  you  will  be  at 
Monte  Carlo  enjoying  more  or  less  forbidden  pleasures 
with  uneducated  croupiers  and  their  families  ? That 
would  be  the  height  of  rudeness.  Where,  then,  is 
your  “ obligatory  minimum  ” of  virtue  ? 

Politician. — If  such  is  the  case,  I can  put  off 
my  trip  to  Nice  for  a day  or  two,  as  I am  curious 
to  hear  what  can  be  said  against  my  axioms. 

Lady. — That’s  right.  And  now  I think  we  are 
aU  very  hungry.  If  it  had  not  been  for  our  culture 
some  of  us  would  have  escaped  long  ago  to  the 
dining-room. 

Politician. — It  appears  to  me  that  culture  and 
the  culinary  art  are  closely  united. 

Lady. — Oh,  dear,  another  joke  ! 

And  thereupon,  after  exchanging  some  doubtful 
witticisms,  all  followed  the  lady  to  her  hospitable 
board. 


THE  THIRD  CONVERSATION 


“ Audiatur  et  tertia  pars." 

On  this  occasion,  by  mutual  consent,  we  assem- 
bled in  the  garden  earlier  than  usual,  so  as  not  to  be 
hurried  at  the  end  of  the  conversation.  Consequently 
all  were  in  a more  serious  frame  of  mind  than  the 
evening  before. 

Politician  {to  Mr.  Z.). — You,  I believe,  wished 
to  raise  an  objection  to  something  or  to  make  a 
remark  upon  what  I said  recently  ? 

Mr.  Z. — Yes  ; with  reference  to  your  definition 
that  a peace  policy  is  a symptom  of  progress,  I 
remembered  at  once  the  words  of  one  of  the  charac- 
ters in  Turgenyef’s  “ Smoke  ” that  “ progress  is  a 
symptom.”  I do  not  know  precisely  what  Turgen- 
yef’s character  meant  by  this,  but  surely  the  natural 
meaning  of  those  words  is  quite  accurate.  Progress 
is,  in  fact,  a symptom. 

Politician. — Of  what  ? 

Mr.  Z. — It  is  a pleasure  to  be  talking  with  intelli- 
gent people.  It  was  exactly  to  this  question  that  I 
was  leading  the  conversation.  I consider  that  pro- 
gress^— that  is,  visible,  rapid  progress — is  always 
a symptom  of  the  end. 

Politician. — I understand  that  where  there  is 
such  progress  as,  for  example,  in  a case  of  creeping 


94 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


paralysis,  that  is  a symptom  of  the  end.  But  in  the 
case  of  culture  or  civilisation,  why  must  progress 
infallibly  be  a symptom  of  the  end  ? 

Mr.  Z. — Well,  it  is  not  so  apparent  as  in  the  case 
of  paralysis  ; nevertheless,  it  is  so. 

Politician. — You  are  convinced,  that  is  clear 
enough  ; but  to  me  it  is  not  even  clear  what  it  is 
of  which  you  are  convinced.  In  the  first  place,  I am 
encouraged  by  your  praise  to  put  again  the  simple 
question,  which  you  thought  clever.  You  say,  "a 
symptom  of  the  end.”  The  end  of  what?  I ask. 

Mr.  Z. — The  end  of  that  of  which  we  were  talking. 
We  were  discussing  the  history  of  mankind  ; that 
historic  “ process  ” which  certainly  has  begun  to  go 
at  an  accelerated  speed,  and  as  I am  convinced 
draws  near  to  its  conclusion. 

Lady. — C’est  la  fin  du  monde,  n'est  ce  pas  ? This  is 
very  curious. 

General. — Well,  at  last  we  have  reached  the 
most  interesting  point. 

Prince. — I suppose,  though,  you  will  not  be  able 
to  leave  out  ” Antichrist  ” ? 

Mr.  Z. — Certainly  not,  it  has  the  first  place. 

Prince  [to  the  Lady). — Please  excuse  me,  I have  a 
terrible  amount  of  very  pressing  business,  so  that 
with  every  wish  to  listen  to  such  interesting  things, 
I must  go  home. 

General. — What  ? Then  how  about  vint  ? 

Politician. — I had  a presentiment  the  day  before 
yesterday  that  there  would  be  some  unpleasantness. 
When  once  religion  comes  in,  expect  trouble. 

“ Tantum  religio  potuit  suadere  malorum.” 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


95 


Prince. — ^There  \ѵШ  be  no  unpleasantness.  I 
shall  endeavour  to  return  at  nine  o’clock,  but  now  I 
really  have  no  time. 

Lady.  — But  why  such  haste  ? Why  did  you  not 
think  about  those  important  matters  before  ? I do 
not  believe  you.  You  must  admit  that  it  is  “ Anti- 
christ ” that  has  suddenly  frightened  you  away. 

Prince.- — I heard  so  much  yesterday  about  polite- 
ness being  the  thing  of  first  importance  that,  acting 
under  that  suggestion,  I decided  to  tell  an  untruth 
for  the  sake  of  politeness.  Now,  I see,  that  this  is 
very  wrong,  and  I will  say  frankly  that,  though  I 
have  in  fact  important  business,  I am  leaving  this 
conversation  chiefly  because  I consider  it  useless  to 
waste  my  time  in  an  argument  about  things  such  as 
may  have  some  meaning,  possibly,  for  papooses. 

Politician. — Evidently  you  have  now  expiated 
your  serious  sin  of  excessive  politeness. 

Lady. — Why  get  angry  ? If  we  are  stupid, 
enlighten  us.  Look  at  me,  I certainly  am  not  angry 
because  you  called  me  a papoose.  Even  papooses 
may  have  true  understanding.  God  reveals  his 
wisdom  to  babes.  But  if  you  find  it  hard  to  listen 
to  conversation  about  Antichrist,  very  well,  we  wfil 
make  peace  about  that.  Your  ѵШа  is  only  a step  or 
two  from  here.  Go  away  now,  attend  to  your  busi- 
ness, but  come  back  for  the  end  of  the  conversation, 
after  Antichrist. 

Prince. — Very  weU,  I will  come  back. 

{When  the  Prince  had  gone  the  General  remarked, 
laughing). — The  cat  knows  whose  meat  she  has 
eaten. 


д6  WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 

Lady.  — What ! Do  you  think,  for  instance,  that 
our  Prince  is  Antichrist  ? 

General.— No,  not  personally ; not  he  person- 
ally : it’s  a long  way  from  the  caterpihar  to  the 
butterfly  ! All  the  same,  he  is  in  that  line.  As 
St.  John  the  Divine  has  already  said  in  his  epistle  ; 
“You  have  heard,  little  children,  that  Antichrist  shall 
come ; even  now  are  there  many  Antichrists.”  So,  you 
see,  among  those  many ; among  the  many,  I say  . . . 

Lady. — You  may,  perchance,  find  yourself  among 
the  “ many.”  On  him  God  will  not  be  hard  ; they 
have  led  him  astray.  He  knows  that  he  will  never 
do  anything  remarkable,  only  walk  about  in  a smart 
uniform  and  set  himself  up  as  though  he  had  got 
into  the  guards  from  a line  regiment.  To  a great 
general  all  this  does  not  matter,  but  it  turns  the  head 
of  a little  officer. 

Politician. — That  is  good  psychology.  All  the 
same,  I do  not  understand  why  he  became  angry  at 
the  mention  of  Antichrist.  Here  am  I,  for  instance. 
I do  not  believe  in  anything  mystic,  yet  it  does  not 
make  me  angry,  but  rather  interests  me  from  the 
human  point  of  view.  I know  that  to  many  it  is  a 
serious  matter;  that  is  to  say,  it  gives  expression 
to  a certain  side  of  human  nature  which  is  some- 
what atrophied  in  me,  but  it  preserves  its  objective 
interest  for  me  too.  For  example,  I am  altogether 
bad  at  painting  and  can  draw  nothing — not  even  a 
straight  line  or  a circle — so  I do  not  discuss  amongst 
painters  what  is  well  drawm  and  what  badly  drawn. 
But  I am  interested  in  questions  of  painting  on 
educational  and  aesthetic  grounds. 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


97 


Lady. — On  such  an  inoffensive  subject  as  that 
one  cannot  get  angry  ; but  you  yourself  hate  religion, 
and  just  now  quoted  some  Latin  abuse  against  it. 

Politician. — Well,  was  it  abuse  ? I,  like  my 
favourite  poet  Lucretius,  blame  religion  for  bloody 
altars  and  for  the  wailing  of  human  victims.  The 
echo  of  this  bloodthirstiness  I hear  in  the  gloomy, 
intolerant  statements  of  our  friend  who  has  just  left 
the  discussion.  But  religious  ideas  in  themselves 
interest  me  very  much,  and,  among  others,  this  idea 
of  “ Antichrist.”  Unfortunately,  on  this  subject 
I happen  to  have  read  only  a book  of  Renan,  and  he 
treats  the  matter  merely  on  the  side  of  historical 
learning,  and  applies  everything  to  Nero.  But  that 
is  nothing.  Of  course  the  idea  of  Antichrist  existed 
much  earlier  amongst  the  Hebrews  than  in  the  time 
of  Nero,  arising  out  of  King  Antiochus  Epiphanes, 
and  it  has  lasted  on  from  that  time,  for  example, 
among  our  schismatics.  It  is  a kind  of  general 
idea. 

General. — Yes,  it  is  aU  very  well  for  your 
Excellency  to  reflect  on  such  things  in  your  leisure 
moments,  but  our  poor  Prince  is  so  engrossed  in 
Evangelical  propaganda  that  he  is  never  able  to 
deliberate  about  Christ  or  Antichrist ; he  has  not 
even  got  more  than  three  hours  in  the  day  left  for 
playing  vint.  He  is  an  honest  man,  and  one  must 
give  him  his  due. 

Lady.  — No,  you  are  too  hard  on  him.  Of  course 
all  such  people  are  confused,  but  we  must  remember 
that  they  are  also  unhappy,  for  there  is  no  joy,  ease, 
or  peace  in  their  lives.  And,  you  know,  somewhere 

w.c.  H 


98 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


in  the  Scriptures  it  is  said  that  Christianity  is  joy  in 
the  Holy  Ghost. 

General. — The  position  is  indeed  oppressive  ; 
not  having  the  spirit  of  Christ  and  yet  pretending  to 
be  true  Christians. 

Mr.  Z. — Particularly  for  Christians,  not  having 
the  very  thing  which  is  the  particular  feature  of 
Christianity. 

General. — But  it  seems  to  me  that  this  sad 
position  is  the  precise  position  of  Antichrist  which 
for  the  more  wise  or  enlightened  is  overburdened  with 
the  consciousness  that  in  the  long  run  deceit,  of 
course,  will  not  pay. 

Mr.  Z.  — At  all  events,  it  is  certain  that  the  idea  of 
Antichrist,  which  according  to  its  Biblical  inter- 
pretation— both  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments — 
is  the  last  act  of  the  historic  tragedy,  will  not  be 
simple  unbelief  or  negation  of  Christianity,  or 
materialism  and  such  like,  but  that  it  be  religious 
imposture,  when  with  the  name  of  Christ  will  be 
associated  forces  in  human  nature  which  are  in  fact 
and  in  essence  foreign,  and  plainly  hostile  to  Christ 
and  His  Spirit. 

General. — Well,  of  course  the  de\dl  would  not 
be  the  devU  if  he  were  to  play  in  the  open  ! 

Politician. — I fear,  then,  lest  aU  Christians 
should  turn  out  to  be  impostors  and  therefore 
according  to  you.  Antichrists.  The  only  possible 
exceptions  would  be  the  unconscious  masses  of  the 
people,  as  far  as  such  stiU  exist  in  the  Christian  world, 
together  with  a certain  number  of  individual  cranks, 
like  you.  Sir.  But  in  any  case,  one  ought  to  regard 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


99 


as  Antichrists  those  people — both  here  in  France  and 
with  us — who  particularly  make  a fuss  about  Chris- 
tianity, who  make  of  it  their  special  occupation, 
and  make  it  the  profession  of  a sort  of  monopoly  or 
privilege  of  their  own.  Such  people  at  the  present 
time  belong  to  one  of  two  classes  which  are  equally 
foreign,  I hope,  to  the  spirit  of  Christ.  Either  some 
sort  of  murderous  shearers,  who  are  ready  at  once 
to  restore  the  Inquisition  and  to  arrange  religious 
massacres,  like  those  pious  abbots  and  “ brave  ” 
" Catholic  ” officers  who  not  long  ago  expressed  their 
best  sentiments  on  the  occasion  of  the  festival  of  a 
certain  depraved  ^ rascal ; or  that  of  the  novel 
fasters  and  celibates  who  discovered  virtue  and  con- 
science as  a kind  of  America,  and  in  other  respects 
have  lost  interior  truthfulness  and  all  common  sense. 
The  first  sort  causes  moral  nausea  and  the  second  sort 
induces  physical  yawning. 

General. — Yes,  in  former  times  Christianity  was 
incomprehensible  to  some  and  odious  to  others  ; 
but  it  is  only  now  that  it  has  become  repulsive.  I 
can  imagine  how  the  devil  rubbed  his  hands  and 
hugged  himself  at  such  a success.  Gracious  heavens ! 

* Evidently  Politician  alludes  to  the  document  drawn 
up  in  memory  of  the  suicide  Henri,  wherein  one  French 
officer  stated  that  he  signed  in  the  hope  of  a new  St.  Bar- 
tholomew’s Day,  another  that  he  hoped  for  a speedy 
hanging  of  all  Protestants,  Freemasons,  and  Jews,  and  a 
certain  abbot  that  he  lived  in  the  hope  of  that  bright  future, 
when  the  skins  of  flayed  Huguenots,  Masons,  and  Jews  would 
be  made  into  cheap  carpets,  and  he  as  a good  Christian 
would  constantly  trample  upon  such  a carpet  with  his  feet. 
These  statements  out  of  some  tens  of  thousands  of  others 
of  the  same  kind  were  printed  in  the  newspaper  Libre 
Parole. 


H 2 


100 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


Lady. — So  that  is  Antichrist  in  your  opinion  ? 

Mr.  Z. — Well,  no  ; I have  only  given  some  ex- 
planatory suggestions  about  its  nature  : the  real 
thing  is  still  to  come. 

Lady. — Is  that  the  simplest  explanation  you  can 
give  of  what  the  thing  is  ? 

Mr.  Z. — Well,  I cannot  guarantee  simplicity.  You 
do  not  light  upon  true  simplicity  all  at  once,  and 
so-called  simplicity  is  artificial,  false — nothing  is 
worse  than  that.  There  is  an  old  proverb  which  a 
friend  of  mine,  now  dead,  loved  to  repeat ; great 
simplicity  is  easily  misleading. 

Lady. — Well,  that  itself  is  not  altogether  simple. 

General. — It  is  apparently  the  same  as  the 
popular  proverb  ; some  simplicity  is  worse  than 
robbery. 

Mr.  Z. — It  is  the  same. 

Lady. — Now  even  I can  understand. 

Mr.  Z. — I am  only  sorry  that  you  don’t  give  your 
whole  explanation  of  Antichrist  in  proverbs. 

Lady. — Well,  explain  it  as  you  know  it. 

Mr.  Z. — First  of  all,  tell  me,  do  you  grant  the 
existence  and  power  of  evil  in  the  world  ? 

Lady. — I w'ould  rather  not  grant  it,  but  there  it 
is  inevitably.  What  do  you  make  of  death,  for  one 
thing  ? Anyhow,  you  can’t  escape  that  e\’il.  I 
believe  that  “ the  last  enemy  to  be  destroyed  is 
death  ” ; now  so  long  as  it  is  not  destroyed,  it  is 
evident  that  evil  is  not  only  strong,  but  is  stronger 
than  good. 

Mr.  Z.  (to  the  General) . — And  what  do  you  think  ? 

General. — I never  shut  my  eyes  in  face  of  bullets 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


lOI 


and  shot,  so  I shall  not  begin  to  flinch  at  more 
slender  questions.  Certainly  evil  exists  just  as 
really  as  good.  God  exists  and  the  devil  also  exists 
— of  course,  only  so  long  as  God  allows  him. 

Politician. — For  myself  I answer  nothing.  My 
opinion  does  not  go  to  the  root  of  things,  but  I 
explained  yesterday  as  well  as  I could,  that  side  of 
the  matter  which  is  clear  to  me.  But  I am  anxious 
to  become  acquainted  with  other  views.  The 
Prince’s  line  of  thought  is  well  known  to  me,  that  is 
to  say,  I know  that  for  me  there  is  no  actual  meaning 
in  it  at  all,  only  a mere  pretence,  qui  n a rime  ni 
raison.  But  the  positive  religious  view  is,  of  course, 
more  persistent  and  interests  me  more.  Hitherto  I 
have  only  been  acquainted  with  it  in  its  official  form, 
which  does  not  satisfy  me.  I should  very  much  like 
to  hear,  at  last,  not  beautiful  phrases  about  these 
things,  but  a natural  human  account  of  them. 

Mr.  Z. — Of  all  the  stars  which  rise  in  the  intel- 
lectual horizon  of  a man  who  reads  attentively  our 
sacred  books,  there  is  none  in  my  opinion  more 
brilliant  and  astonishing  than  that  which  shines  in 
the  phrase  of  the  Gospel,  “ Suppose  ye  that  I am 
come  to  give  peace  on  earth  ? I tell  you.  Nay  ; but 
rather  divisions.”  He  came  to  bring  truth  on  earth, 
but  truth,  like  good,  before  all  else  divides. 

Lady. — This  needs  explanation.  Why  did  Christ 
call  Himself  prince  de  la  paix,  and  why  did  He  also 
say  that  peacemakers  are  called  sons  of  God  ? 

Mr.  Z. — And  are  you  really  wishing  me  to  obtain 
that  higher  status  by  reconciling  contradictory 
texts  ? 


102 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


Lady. — Precisely. 

Mr.  Z. — Well,  notice  that  the  only  way  of  recon- 
ciling them  is  by  making  a distinction  between  good 
or  true  peace  and  the  peace  which  is  bad  or  false. 
This  distinction  is  plainly  pointed  out  by  Him  who 
brought  a true  peace  and  a good  enmity  : ” Peace  I 
leave  with  you,  My  peace  I give  unto  you  : not  as 
the  world  giveth,  give  I unto  you.”  That  is  to  say, 
there  is  the  good  peace  of  Christ  founded  on  this 
division  that  Christ  came  to  bring  on  earth,  namely, 
on  the  distinction  between  good  and  evil,  between 
truth  and  falsehood  ; and  there  is  the  bad  peace  of 
the  world,  founded  on  a confusion  or  merely  exterior 
unity  of  that  which  inwardly  is  at  enmity  with  itself. 

Lady. — How  do  you  explain  the  difference 
between  good  and  bad  peace  ? 

Mr.  Z. — Almost  in  the  same  way  as  the  General 
did  three  days  ago,  when  he  jokingly  observed  that 
there  is  such  a thing  as  a good  peace,  for  example, 
the  peace  of  Nishstadt  or  of  Kutchuk-Kainardzh. 
Underlying  this  joke  there  is  a more  general  and 
important  idea.  In  spiritual  strife  as  in  political, 
a good  peace  is  one  which  is  concluded  only  on 
obtaining  the  object  of  the  war. 

Lady. — But  in  the  last  resort  whence  arises  the 
war  between  good  and  evil  ? Is  it  absolutely  neces- 
sary for  them  to  fight  one  against  the  other  ? And 
can  there  be  between  them  a real  collision — corps  a 
corps  ? Of  course  in  an  ordinary  war,  when  one 
side  begins  to  be  reinforced  and  then  the  other 
opposing  side  seeks  reinforcements,  the  quarrel 
must  be  settled  by  actual  battles,  with  guns  and 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


103 


bayonets.  But  in  the  struggle  between  good  and 
evil  this  is  not  so,  and  when  the  good  side  is  re- 
inforced, the  bad  side  at  once  becomes  enfeebled  and 
it  never  comes  to  an  actual  pitting  of  one  against 
the  other,  so  that  all  this  is  only  in  a figurative  sense. 
That  is,  it  is  only  necessary  to  make  sure  that  the 
good  in  people  is  the  greater,  then  the  evil  at  once 
will  be  the  less. 

Mr.  Z. — That  is,  you  think  that  if  only  good 
people  themselves  would  become  still  better,  then 
the  bad  people  would  lose  their  badness  till  finally 
they  also  become  good  ? 

Lady. — It  seems  to  me  that  is  so. 

Mr.  Z. — Well,  are  any  occasions  known  to  you 
when  the  goodness  of  a good  man  made  the  bad  man 
good  or  at  least  less  evil  ? 

Lady. — No ; to  tell  the  truth,  I have  neither  seen 
such  occasions  nor  heard — but  stop,  what  you  said 
just  now  corresponds,  I think,  with  the  subject  of 
your  conversation  with  the  Prince  the  day  before 
yesterday  concerning  the  fact  that  even  Christ  with 
all  His  goodness  could  do  no  good  to  the  soul  of 
Judas  Iscariot  or  the  wicked  thief.  As  the  answer 
to  this  was  left  for  the  Prince,  do  not  forget  about  it 
when  he  comes. 

Mr.  Z. — Well,  since  I do  not  take  him  for  Anti- 
christ, I do  not  believe  in  his  coming,  still  less  in 
his  theological  readiness.  But  not  wishing  that  this 
undecided  question  should  clog  our  conversation,  I 
offer  meanwhile  this  answer,  which  the  Prince  ought 
to  work  out  from  his  own  point  of  view,  “ Why  did 
not  Christ  in  His  goodness  regenerate  the  evil  souls 


104 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


of  Judas  and  Co.  ? ” Simply  because  men  were  then 
too  much  in  the  dark  and  only  very  few  souls  had 
reached  the  stage  of  moral  development  in  which 
the  inward  strength  of  truth  can  be  perceptible. 
Judas  and  Co.  were  stiU  too  " undeveloped.”  Now 
Christ  Himself  said  to  His  disciples  : “ The  works 
that  I do,  shah  ye  do  also — and  greater  than  these 
shall  ye  do  ” ; which  means  that,  in  the  higher  degree 
of  moral  progress  to  which  mankind  has  attained  in 
our  days,  the  true  disciples  of  Christ  are  able,  in  the 
strength  of  their  gentleness  and  non-resistance  to 
evil,  to  do  moral  wonders  greater  than  those  which 
were  possible  eighteen  centuries  ago.  . . . 

General. — Excuse  me  ! If  they  are  able  to  do  so 
why  don’t  they  do  so  ? Have  you  seen  these  new 
wonders  ? Why,  look  at  our  Prince,  even  now, 
” after  eighteen  centuries  of  the  moral  development 
of  the  Christian  conscience,”  he  is  in  no  way  able  to 
enlighten  my  dark  soul ; I remain  the  same  savage 
that  I was  before  I met  him,  and  still,  as  formerly, 
after  God  and  Russia,  I love  most  of  all  in  the  world 
the  work  of  the  army  in  general  and  of  the  artihery 
in  particular.  And,  moreover,  our  Prince  is  not  the 
only  one  I have  encountered,  I have  met  many  other 
non-resisters  mightier  than  he. 

Mr.  Z. — Now,  why  get  on  to  such  personal 
grounds  ? and  what  do  j-ou  want  of  me  ? I put 
before  you  on  behalf  of  our  absent  opponent  a 
passage  of  the  Gospel  which  he  had  forgotten,  and 
beyond  that 

“ tt'hether  it  reason  or  mireason  seem — 

I do  not  answer  for  another’s  dream.” 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY  105 

Lady. — Henceforward  I too  shall  take  the  part 
of  the  poor  Prince.  If  he  wished  to  be  wise  he  would 
answer  the  General  thus  : " I and  others  like  me, 
whom  you  have  met,  count  ourselves  true  disciples 
of  Christ  onty  in  regard  to  our  thoughts  and  con- 
duct, not  on  the  grounds  that  we  have  greater 
powers.  But,  in  fact,  there  do  exist  somewhere,  or 
soon  will,  Christians  more  perfect  than  we  are — 
they  may  penetrate  your  stronghold  of  darkness.” 

Mr.  Z. — This  answer,  of  course,  would  be  of  prac- 
tical utility  were  it  not  that  it  made  its  appeal  to 
unknown  instances.  But  as  it  is,  it  is  not  serious. 
They,  let  us  suppose,  say,  indeed  they  must  say — we 
can  do  nothing  either  greater  than  that  which 
Christ  did,  nor  equal  to  His  works  nor  even  less  than 
them,  but  only  something  which  approximates  to 
them.  What  in  sound  logic  must  be  deduced  from 
such  an  avowal  ? 

General.  — Apparently,  only  this,  that  the  words 
of  Christ : “Ye  shall  do  what  I have  done  and  greater 
works  than  these  ” were  said  not  to  these  men,  but 
to  some  other  person  altogether  unlike  them. 

Lady.^ — Still,  one  can  imagine  that  some  man 
might  observe  to  the  end  the  commandment  of 
Christ  about  love  towards  enemies  and  forgiveness 
of  injuries,  and  that  then  he  would  receive  through 
that  same  Christ,  the  power  to  convert  by  bis  gentle- 
ness evil  souls  into  good  ones. 

Mr.  Z. — An  experiment  of  this  kind  was  made  not 
so  long  ago ; not  only  did  it  fail,  but  it  proved  the 
direct  opposite  of  wLat  you  propound.  There  was 
a man  who  knew  no  limits  to  his  gentleness,  and  who 


іоб 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


not  only  forgave  every  injury,  but  met  every  new 
injury  with  new  and  increasing  acts  of  kindness. 
Well,  what  happened  ? Did  he  awaken  the  soul  of 
his  enemy  ; did  he  regenerate  him  morally  ? Alas  ! 
he  only  hardened  the  heart  of  the  evil-doer,  and  fell 
by  his  hand  in  a piteous  manner. 

Lady. — What  are  you  talking  about  ? Who  is 
this  man  ? Where  and  when  did  he  live  ? 

Mr.  Z. — Not  so  long  ago,  and  in  Petersburg.  I 
thought  you  knew  him.  He  was  the  chamberlain 
Delario. 

Lady. — I have  never  heard  of  him,  and  I thought 
I could  tell  off  the  whole  of  Petersburg  on  my  fingers. 

Politician. — I,  also,  do  not  remember  him. 
But  what  is  the  history  of  this  chamberlain  ? 

Mr.  Z. — It  is  excellently  set  forth  in  an  unpub- 
lished poem  of  Alexis  Tolstoy. 

Lady. — Unpublished  ? Then,  of  course,  it  is  a 
mere  farce.  What  has  this  got  to  do  with  serious 
matters  ? 

Mr.  Z. — I assure  you  that,  though  a farce  in  form, 
yet  it  has  a real  content  which  is  very  serious  and 
essentially  true.  At  any  rate,  the  actual  relation 
between  good  and  evil  in  human  life  is  expressed  in 
these  playful  verses  far  better  than  I could  explain 
it  with  my  serious  prose.  Of  one  thing  I have  not 
the  least  doubt.  When  the  heroes  of  some  world- 
renowned  novels,  in  which  the  black  soil  of  psycho- 
logy is  skilfully  and  seriously  ploughed  up,  become 
mere  literary  reminiscences  for  bookmen,  this  farce 
will  retain  all  its  artistic  and  philosophical  truth, 
because,  though  proceeding  on  comic  and  wildly 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY  107 

caricaturing  lines,  it  has  touched  the  subsoil  depth 
of  the  moral  question. 

Lady.- — Well,  I do  not  believe  in  your  paradoxes. 
You  are  afflicted  with  the  spirit  of  contradiction, 
and  you  always  defy  public  opinion  on  purpose. 

Mr.  Z.- — I should  probably  defy  it  if  it  existed. 
But  all  the  same,  I will  tell  you  the  story  of  the 
chamberlain  Delario  as  you  do  not  know  it,  and  I 
remember  it  by  heart. 

The  wicked  robber  plunged  his  dagger 
In  the  breast  of  Delario  ; 

And  he,  for  his  part,  lifted  his  hat  and  said, 

“ Dear  Sir,  I thank  you.” 

Then  in  the  left  side  the  robber  struck  again 
His  dreadful  dagger, 

And  Delario  said,  ” Wliat  a splendid  dagger 
That  is  of  yours.” 

Then  also  the  right  side  this  cruel  robber 
Pierced  as  before. 

But  Delario  with  a gentle  smile 
Barely  reproved  him. 

The  miscreant  then  raised  his  dagger  up 

And  struck  him  in  a hundred  places  ; 

Said  Delario,  ” I pray  you.  Sir, 

To  come  to  tea  at  three  o’clock  to-morrow.” 

The  wicked  man  in  tears  then  fell  upon  the  ground 
And  trembled  like  a leaf. 

But  Delario  said,  " Oh,  oh,  dear  Sir,  get  up. 

The  floor  is  dirty  ” ; 

But  the  robber  would  not  be  comforted 
And  wept  the  more. 

Then  Delario  said,  " How  strange  is  this  ! 

I could  not  have  expected  it ; 

To  weep  in  such  a way  for  such  a little  thing 
Isn’t  possible  ! 


io8 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


I’ll  let  you  have  a nice  estate  to  farm, 

The  order  of  Stanislas 

I’ll  pin  upon  your  breast,  friend. 

For  an  example. 

A word  from  me  to  the  authorities  procures  it — 
I’m  chamberlain. 

My  daughter  Dunia  in  marriage 
I will  give. 

And  a hundred  thousand  roubles.  Sir, 

My  daughter’s  dowry. 

Meanwhile  do  take  this  little  portrait  of  myself 
In  memory. 

I’m  sorry  it  is  not  framed,  but  take  it  so 
From  me.” 

The  murderer  got  up,  but  bitterer  than  pepper 
Was  his  mood  ; 

The  portrait  gift  he  could  forgive. 

But  not  the  offers. 

He  hardly  had  the  Stanlislavsky  order 
Upon  his  breast 

Than  a godless  rage  possessed  him,  and  his  dagger 
Dipped  he  in  poison. 

And  he  laid  in  wait  for  Delario 

And  stabbed  him  once  again. 

Down  fell  Delario  to  the  ground,  being  unable 
To  remain  in  Iris  armchair, 

And  the  other  rushed  upstairs  and  in  the  entresol 
Seduced  his  daughter. 

And  then  fled  to  Tambof,  where,  as  Governor, 

He  was  by  all  beloved. 

Afterward  he  lived  in  Moscow,  a senator 
By  all  esteemed. 

Then  our  House  of  Lords  he  joined 
For  a short  season. 

What  an  example  was  he  to  us  all. 

And  what  a lesson  ! 


Lady. — How  charming,  and  I did  not  expect  it. 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY  109 

Politician. — Really  excellent.  “My  daughter’s 
dowry  ” — admirable.  “ Not  the  offers  ! ” and  “ Then 
fled  to  Tambof ! ” — deux  vrais  coups  de  maitre! 

Mr.  Z. — But  what  uprightness,  you  notice. 
Delario  was  not  that  polished  benefactor  who  is 
never  met  with  in  real  life.  He  was  a living  man 
with  all  the  human  failings^ — both  boastful  (I  am  a 
chamberlain)  and  covetous  (a  hundred  thousand 
laid  by) — and  his  fantastic  impenetrability  to  the 
assassin’s  dagger  is  only  a sign  of  his  boundless  good 
nature,  invincible  and  almost  insensible  to  all 
affronts,  such  as  does  exist,  though  very  rarely. 
Delario  is  not  the  personification  of  virtue,  but  a 
naturally  good  man  whose  goodness  of  heart  has 
overcome  the  bad  qualities  and  thrust  them  out 
on  to  the  soul’s  surface  in  the  form  of  inoffensive 
weaknesses.  Likewise,  the  vhlain  is  in  no  sense 
merely  a walking  extract  of  vice,  but  an  ordinary 
mixture  of  good  and  bad  qualities  ; but  in  him  the 
evil  of  envy  was  seated  in  the  lowest  depths  of  his 
soul  and  thrust  out  all  good  on  to  the  epidermis  of 
the  soul,  so  to  speak,  where  goodness  took  the  form 
of  a very  living  but  superficial  sensitiveness.  When 
to  a list  of  cruel  injuries  Delario  answered  with 
polite  words  and  an  invitation  to  a cup  of  tea,  the 
sensitiveness  of  the  “ villain’s  ” moral  epidermis 
was  strongly  touched  by  these  manifestations  of 
good  feeling,  and  he  gave  himself  up  to  the  most 
expansive  regret.  When  also  the  politeness  of  the 
chamberlain  passed  into  the  heartfelt  sympathy  of  a 
truly  good  man,  who  repays  his  foe  for  evil  not  only 
by  showing  the  goodness  of  polite  words  and  actions, 


no 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


but  by  real  and  living  goodness  of  practical  aid — 
when  Delario  entered  into  the  condition  of  life  of 
his  villain,  ready  to  share  with  him  bis  means, 
make  arrangements  for  his  official  affairs  and  even 
his  domestic  happiness — then  this  real  goodness, 
penetrating  the  deepest  moral  stratum  of  the  villain, 
discloses  his  interior  moral  worthlessness,  and  reach- 
ing at  length  the  bottom  of  his  soul,  rouses  up  there 
a crocodile  of  envy.  The  villain  is  not  envious  of 
the  goodness  of  Delario ; he  himself,  of  course, 
might  be  good,  only  he  did  not  feel  his  goodness 
when  he  “ wept  in  heartfelt  pain.”  No,  he  is,  in  fact, 
envious  of  the  unfathomable  depth  and  absolute 
seriousness  of  this  goodness.  Is  not  this  real ; does 
it  not  happen  in  real  life  ? From  one  and  the  same 
moisture  of  fertilising  rain  there  spring  both  the 
beneficial  forces  of  wholesome  herbs  and  the  poison 
of  the  poisonous.  Likewise  also  a real  good  deed  in 
the  last  resort  increases  the  good  in  the  good  and  the 
evil  in  the  evil.  Ought  we,  then — ^have  we  the  right 
— to  give  free  scope,  always  and  without  discrimina- 
tion, to  our  good  feelings  ? Ought  we  to  praise 
parents  who  zealously  water  poisonous  herbs  with 
a good  watering-can  in  a garden  where  their  children 
are  walking  ? What  about  the  betrayal  of  Dunia, 
I ask  you  ? 

General. — That  is  evident ! If  only  Delario 
had  moderately  hit  his  villain  on  the  head  and  driven 
him  out  of  the  house,  then,  of  course,  he  would  not 
have  got  so  far  as  the  entresol. 

Mr.  Z. — In  fact,  allow  him  to  have  the  right  to 
sacrifice  himself  to  his  goodness  ; allow  that,  as  in 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


III 


times  of  yore,  there  were  martyrs  of  the  faith,  so 
now  there  must  be  martyrs  of  goodness.  But  about 
Dunia  ; what  is  to  be  done,  I ask  you  ? You  see, 
she  is  simple  and  young,  and  to  argue  anything  for 
herself  she  is  neither  able  nor  willing.  So  must  we 
not  be  sorry  for  her  ? 

' Politician. — I agree  we  must  be  sorry.  But 
I,  myself,  am  still  more  sorry  that  Antichrist, 
apparently,  has  run  away  from  us  together  with 
the  villain  to  Tambof. 

Mr.  Z. — We  will  catch  him,  your  Excellency  ; 
we  will  catch  him  ! Yesterday  you  were  pleased  to 
interpret  history  as  meaning  that  primitive  mankind 
— consisting  originally  of  a multitude  of  more  or  less 
savage  peoples,  different  from  each  other,  in  part 
unknown  to  one  another  and,  in  part,  at  enmity 
with  one  another — by  degrees  evolves  out  of  itself 
the  best  educated  part,  the  civilised  or  European 
world,  which  gradually  increases  and  spreads,  and 
finally  must  embrace  all  the  peoples  that  are  left 
behind  in  this  historic  movement,  including  them  all 
in  one  solid  and  peaceful  international  unity.  The 
establishment  of  a lasting  international  peace — 
that  is  your  formula,  is  it  not  ? 

Politician. — Yes,  and  that  formula,  when  it 
attains  to  the  realisation  which  awaits  it  even  in  the 
near  future,  will  accomplish  many  more  substantial 
triumphs  of  civilisation  than  can  now  appear. 
Only  reflect  how  much  bad  will  of  necessity  be 
atrophied,  and  how  much  good,  in  the  very  nature 
of  things,  will  break  forth  and  unfold,  how  much 
force  will  be  set  free  for  productive  occupations. 


II2 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


how  science  and  the  arts  will  flourish,  and  trade,  and 
commerce  . . . 

Mr.  Z. — Well,  but  the  abolition  of  disease  and 
death,  do  you  include  that  in  the  number  of  the 
future  triumphs  of  civilisation  ? 

Politician. — Of  course,  to  some  extent.  Now, 
already,  much  has  been  done  in  the  direction 
of  sanitation,  hygiene,  antiseptics,  organothera- 
peutics  . . . 

Mr.  Z. — But  do  these  undoubted  triumphs  on  the 
positive  side  really  balance  the  undoubted  increase 
of  the  symptoms  of  degeneracy  in  the  spheres  of 
neuropathology  and  psychopathology,  symptoms 
which  accompany  the  advance  of  civilisation  ? 

Politician. — Well,  in  what  sort  of  scales  is  that 
to  be  weighed  ? 

Mr.  Z. — At  any  rate,  it  is  incontestable  that  the 
plus  increases  and  the  minus  increases,  and  the  result 
is  something  not  far  from  nought.  That  is  the 
balance-sheet  as  regards  diseases.  Now  with  refer- 
ence to  death,  the  advance  of  civilisation,  appa- 
rently, is  represented  simply  by  nought. 

Politician. — Indeed,  does  the  advance  of  civilisa- 
tion set  itself  such  a problem  as  the  abolition  of 
death  ? 

Mr.  Z. — I know  that  it  does  not  set  this,  but, 
of  course,  for  that  very  reason  it  cannot  itself  be  set 
very  high.  Now,  in  fact,  if  I knew  for  certain  that 
both  I myself  and  all  that  is  dear  to  me  must  for 
ever  disappear,  would  it  not  be  all  the  same  to  me 
whether  various  people,  somewhere  or  other,  were 
fighting  amongst  themselves  or  living  in  peace. 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


113 

whether  they  were  civilised  or  savage,  polite  or 
impolite  ? 

Politician. — Yes,  from  a personal,  egoistical 
point  of  view,  certainly  it  would  be  all  the 
same. 

Mr.  Z. — From  an  egoistical  ? Excuse  me,  from 
every  point  of  view.  Death  equalises  all,  and  in 
face  of  it  egoism  and  altruism,  in  like  manner,  are 
foolish. 

Politician. — Be  it  so,  but  you  know  the  foolish- 
ness of  egoism  does  not  prevent  us  from  being  egoists, 
and  in  the  same  way  altruism  (as  far  as  it  is  in  general 
possible)  is  really  achieved  without  any  reasonable 
motives,  and  the  question  of  death  has  no  signi- 
ficance. I know  that  my  children  and  grandchildren 
will  die,  but  this  does  not  hinder  me  from  looking 
after  their  welfare  as  if  it  were  eternal.  I labour 
for  them  chiefly  because  I love  them,  and  to  give  my 
life  up  to  them  gives  me  satisfaction.  “ I find  a 
certain  gusto  in  it.”  C’est  simple  comme  bonjour. 

Lady. — Yes,  so  long  as  all  goes  well — though 
even  then  the  thought  of  death  comes  in  all  the  same. 
Now,  how  about  the  time  when  various  misfor- 
tunes begin  with  the  children  and  grandchildren  ? 
What  satisfaction  and  what  gusto  then  ? It  is  just 
like  the  water-lily  in  the  swamp — you  grasp,  and 
fall  in. 

Mr.  Z. — Yes,  and  besides  this,  in  the  case  of  chil- 
dren and  grandchildren,  it  is  of  the  very  nature  of 
things  that  you  take  care  of  them  quand  тёте,  not 
waiting  to  solve  or  even  consider  the  question  as 
to  whether  your  care  can  afford  them  real  and  final 


w.c. 


1 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


114 

good.  You  take  trouble  about  them  not  for  some 
end,  but  because  you  have  a living  affection  for  them  ; 
but  it  is  impossible  to  have  such  affection  for  man- 
kind of  the  future  which  is  as  yet  non-existent ; 
and  here  comes  in,  with  aU  its  insistence,  the  question 
of  our  conception  of  the  final  meaning  or  purpose 
of  our  care,  and  if  this  question  in  the  last  resort  is 
resolved  by  death,  if,  that  is  to  say,  the  final  result 
of  your  progress  and  your  culture  is  in  any  case 
death  for  each  and  all,  then  it  is  clear  that  every 
progressive  activity  of  civilisation  is  in  vain — it  is 
aimless  and  senseless. 

[Here  the  speaker  suddenly  stopped,  and  the  others 
turned  their  heads  at  the  sound  of  the  bell  ringing  at 
the  door,  and  for  several  moments  remained  in  astonish- 
ment. There  entered  into  the  garden,  approaching  the 
speakers  with  unsteady  gait — the  Prince.) 

Lady. — Oh  ! But  we  have  not  yet  even  begun 
about  Antichrist. 

Prince. — That  does  not  matter.  I have  changed 
my  mind,  and  I am  convinced  that  I ought  not 
to  have  expressed  disapprobation  of  the  errors 
of  my  friends  without  having  listened  to  their 
justification. 

Lady  {in  a triumphant  tone  to  the  General). — Well, 
you  see.  What  now  ? 

General  [dryly). — Humph. 

Mr.  Z.  [to  the  Prince). — You  have  come  very 
opportunely.  The  conversation  now  turns  on  this  : 
is  it  worth  while  to  care  about  progress  if  we  know 
that  its  end  is  always  death  for  every  man,  whether 
he  be  a savage  or  the  furthest  advanced  European  of 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


115 

the  future  ? What  would  you  say  to  that  according 
to  your  theory  ? 

Prince. — True  Christian  teaching  does  not  even 
allow  such  a stating  of  the  question.  The  Gospel 
solution  of  it  is  expressed  with  particular  clearness 
and  force  in  the  parable  of  the  husbandmen.  The 
husbandmen  imagined  that  the  garden  into  which 
they  were  sent  to  work  for  the  proprietor  was  their 
own  property,  that  everything  in  the  garden  was 
made  for  them  and  that  their  business  was  only  to 
enjoy  themselves  in  that  garden  for  life,  forgetting 
about  the  owner  and  slaying  those  who  reminded 
them  of  him  and  of  their  obligations  to  him.  Now, 
nearly  all  people  are  like  those  husbandmen,  and  live 
in  the  foolish  assurance  that  they  themselves  are 
masters  of  their  life  and  that  it  is  given  to  them  for 
their  enjoyment.  But  this  is  obviously  foolish.  Of 
course  if  we  are  sent  here,  it  is  at  the  will  of  someone 
and  to  some  end.  Now  we  people,  we  have  decided 
that  we  are  like  mushrooms  ; we  were  born  and  we 
live  only  for  our  own  pleasure ; it  is  evident,  however, 
that  we  are  wrong,  just  as  the  workman  would  be 
wrong  who  did  not  carry  out  his  master’s  will.  Now 
the  will  of  the  master  is  expressed  in  the  teaching  of 
Christ.  Only  let  people  carry  out  this  teaching,  and 
the  Kingdom  of  God  will  be  established  on  earth  and 
people  will  receive  the  greatest  good  accessible  to 
them.  Everything  lies  in  this.  Seek  ye  the  Kingdom 
of  God  and  His  Righteousness,  and  the  rest  of  things  will 
be  added  unto  you.  We  seek  the  rest  of  things  and  do 
not  find  them,  and  so  far  from  establishing  the 
Kingdom  of  God,  we  destroy  it — with  our  various 


II6 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


governments,  armies,  law  courts,  universities,  manu- 
factories . . . 

General  [aside). — Well,  you  have  set  up  a 
machine  ! 

Politician  [to  the  Prince) . — Have  you  finished  ? 

Prince. — Yes. 

Politician. — I must  say  that  your  solution  of  the 
question  seems  to  me  simply  incomprehensible. 
You  speak  as  though  you  were  demonstrating  and 
explaining  something  that  you  wished  to  press  home, 
but  meanwhile  all  that  you  say  is  a series  of  arbitrary 
assertions  which  have  no  connection  with  each  other. 
For  instance,  you  say : “If  we  are  sent  here  it  is  at 
the  will  of  someone  and  for  some  end.”  This, 
apparently,  is  your  main  idea,  but  what  is  there  in  it  ? 
Whence  did  you  get  the  idea  that  we  are  sent  here  by 
someone  for  something  ? Who  told  you  this  ? It 
is  true  that  we  exist  here  on  the  earth,  but  to  say  that 
our  existence  here  is  the  result  of  being  sent  is  simply 
an  unproved  assertion.  When,  for  example,  I was  in 
my  youth  sent  as  an  envoy,  I knew  it  for  certain, 
and  I also  knew  by  whom  and  for  what  I w^as  sent. 
I knew,  in  the  first  place,  because  I had  incontestable 
documents  about  it ; in  the  second  place,  because  I 
had  both  a personal  audience  uith  the  late  Emperor 
Alexander  Nicholaevich,  and  personally  received  his 
Imperial  instructions  ; and  in  the  third  place,  because 
I received  three  times  a year  ten  thousand  roubles 
in  gold.  Now,  if  instead  of  all  this,  a strange  man 
had  come  up  to  me  in  the  street  and  announced  to 
me  that  I was  an  envoy  and  was  sent  somewhere  for 
some  thing,  I should  have  only  begun  to  look  round 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


117 

me  to  see  whether  there  was  not  a policeman  in  the 
vicinity,  to  defend  me  from  this  maniac,  who  might 
— if  you  please — make  an  attempt  on  my  life.  But 
with  regard  to  the  case  in  question,  when  you  hold  no 
incontestable  documents  from  your  supposed  master, 
when  you  have  had  no  personal  audience  with  him, 
and  are  receiving  no  salary  from  him,  in  what  sense 
are  you  an  envoy  ?/  Now,  besides,  you  set  down  not 
only  yourself,  but  all  the  rest  as  well,  not  only  as 
envoys,  but  also  as  working  men.  By  what  right  ? 
I don’t  understand  your  grounds.  It  seems  to  me 
that  this  is  a rhetorical  improvisation  ires  mol 
inspiree  d'ailleurs. 

Lady. — Now  you  are  pretending  again.  You 
understand  quite  well  that  the  Prince  was  not  trying 
at  all  to  refute  your  unbelief,  but  was  stating  the 
general  Christian  view  that  we  are  all  dependent  upon 
God  and  are  bound  to  serve  Him. 

Politician. — Well,  I don’t  understand  service 
without  salary,  and  if  it  is  proved  that  the  salary 
alike  in  all  cases  is  death,  je  presente  mes  compli- 
ments. 

Lady. — But,  of  course,  you  will  die  anyhow,  no 
one  will  question  that. 

Politician. — Anyhow  ! Yes,  and  that  proves 
that  life  is  not  service,  and  if  my  assent  is  not  required 
for  my  death  any  more  than  for  my  birth,  then  I 
prefer  to  look  upon  death,  as  also  life,  as  being  merely 
a necessity  of  Nature  and  not  to  bring  in  the  idea  of 
some  sort  of  service  to  some  kind  of  master.  But 
my  conclusion  is  this  ; Live  while  you  can,  and 
strive  to  live  as  wisely  and  well  as  possible,  but  the 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


ii8 

condition  of  a wise  and  good  life  is  peaceful  culture. 
As  for  the  rest,  I assert  that  the  so-called  solution  of 
the  question  which  the  Prince  propounded  on  the 
ground  of  Christian  teaching  will  not  stand  criticism  ; 
but  as  to  that  let  others  speak  who  are  more  com- 
petent than  I. 

General. — What  sort  of  a decision,  indeed,  have 
we  here  ? Neither  solution  nor  statement,  but  only 
a verbal  evasion  of  the  question.  It  is  just  as  though 
I were  to  invest  a hostile  fortress  shown  on  a map 
with  certain  shown  battalions  of  mine,  and  were 
then  to  imagine  that  I had  captured  it.  This  is  just 
what  happened,  you  know,  in  the  famous  soldiers’ 
song  : 

“ The  Devil  carried  off  a quarter  of  us 
As  we  were  taking  the  heights. 

The  princes  and  the  counts  came, 

The  surveyors  made  their  maps 
On  great  sheets  of  foolscap. 

It  all  looked  smooth  on  paper, 

But  they  forgot  the  precipices, 

And  how  to  get  across  them.” 

The  result  of  which  is  well  known. 

“ At  the  heights  of  Thediuchin 
But  two  companies  of  us  arrived. 

The  regiments  disappeared.” 

Prince.- — This  is  all  beyond  me ! Is  this  all 
that  you  can  reply  to  what  I said  ? 

General.- — But  the  point  which  seemed  to  me 
particularly  unintelligible  in  what  you  said,  was  the 
matter  of  the  mushrooms,  as  though  they  live  for 
their  own  pleasure.  I have  always  supposed  that 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


119 

they  live  for  the  pleasure  of  those  who  like  mush- 
rooms in  sour  cream,  or  a mushroom  pie.  Now,  if 
your  Kingdom  of  God  on  earth  leaves  death  un- 
touched, then  it  follows  that  people  will  have  no 
choice  about  living,  and  in  your  Kingdom  of  God 
they  will  live  precisely  as  mushrooms — ^not  the 
joyful  mushrooms  that  you  suppose,  but  real  mush- 
rooms which  are  fried  in  a frying  pan.  Similarly 
for  people  in  your  earthly  Kingdom  of  God,  every- 
thing will  end  one  way,  namely,  death  will  devour 
them. 

Lady. — The  Prince  did  not  say  that. 

General.' — Not  that  nor  anything  else.  What 
reason  is  there  for  this  silence  about  the  most 
important  point  ? 

Mr.  Z.— Before  taking  up  this  question,  I should 
like  to  know  what  was  the  source  of  the  parable 
in  which  you.  Prince,  expressed  your  view  ? Or  is  it 
your  own  composition  ? 

Prince. — Composition,  indeed  ! You  know  it 
comes  from  the  Gospel. 

Mr.  Z. — No,  not  so  ! There  is  no  such  parable 
found  in  any  of  the  Gospels. 

Lady. — Heaven  help  you  ! Why  do  you  distort 
the  Prince’s  meaning  ? You  know  it  is  the  parable 
of  the  husbandmen  in  the  Gospel. 

Mr.  Z. — Superficially  it  is  somewhat  like  it,  but 
altogether  different  both  in  tenor  and  meaning. 

Lady. — What  do  you  mean  ? Hold  hard.  It 
seems  to  me  to  be  entirely  the  same  parable.  As  you 
reason  so  subtly,  I don’t  trust  a word  of  what  you 
say. 


120 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


Mr.  Z. — You  needn’t ; I have  the  book  in  my 
pocket.  {Here  he  took  out  a small  copy  of  the  New 
Testament  and  began  to  turn  over  the  leaves.)  The 
parable  of  the  husbandmen  is  found  in  three  Gospels  ; 
Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke  ; there  is  no  material 
difference  between  the  three  texts.  So  it  vdll  do  to 
read  it  over  in  one  Gospel — the  most  detailed — Luke. 
It  is  in  the  twentieth  chapter,  which  contains  the  last 
and  final  discourse  of  Christ  to  the  people.  Things 
were  drawing  to  a close,  and  here  it  is  related  (end 
of  the  nineteenth  and  beginning  of  the  twentieth 
chapter)  how  the  adversaries  of  Christ — the  parties 
of  the  High  Priests  and  the  Scribes — made  decided 
attacks  on  Him,  publicly  requesting  that  He  should 
show  the  full  extent  of  His  activity,  and  say  by  what 
right  and  by  what  authority  He  was  acting.  But, 
excuse  me,  I had  better  read  it  {reading) : " And  He 
taught  daily  in  the  temple.  But  the  chief  priests 
and  the  scribes  and  the  chief  of  the  people  sought 
to  destroy  Him,  and  could  not  find  what  they  might 
do ; for  all  the  people  were  very  attentive  to  hear 
Him.  And  it  came  to  pass  that  on  one  of  those  days, 
as  He  taught  the  people  in  the  temple,  and  preached 
the  Gospel,  the  chief  priests  and  the  scribes  came 
upon  Him,  with  the  elders,  and  spake  unto  Him, 
saying.  Tell  us  by  what  authority  doest  Thou  these 
things  ? or  who  is  He  that  gave  Thee  this  authority  ? 
And  He  answered  and  said  unto  them,  I wall  also 
ask  you  one  thing  ; and  answer  Me  : The  baptism 
of  John,  was  it  from  heaven,  or  of  men  ? And  they 
reasoned  with  themselves,  saving,  if  we  shall  saj?-. 
From  Heaven  ; He  W'ill  say,  YTiy  then  believed  j’ou 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


I2I 


him  not  ? But  and  if  we  say,  Of  men  ; all  the 
people  will  stone  us  : for  they  be  persuaded  that 
John  was  a prophet.  And  they  answered,  that  they 
could  not  tell  whence  it  was.  And  Jesus  said  unto 
them.  Neither  tell  I you  by  what  authority  I do 
these  things." 

Lady. — Why  do  you  read  this  ? It  is  good  that 
Christ  did  not  answer  when  they  questioned  Him  ; 
but  what  has  this  to  do  with  the  husbandmen  ? 

Mr.  Z. — Wait ; it  is  aU  one  thing.  You  were 
wrong  in  saying  that  Christ  did  not  answer.  He 
answered  quite  definitely  and  twice  over ; He  pointed 
to  His  activities  as  a witness  which  His  questioners 
could  not  reject,  and  besides.  He  proved  that  they 
themselves  had  no  power  or  right  over  Him,  since 
they  acted  only  from  dread  of  the  people  and  con- 
formed to  the  opinions  of  the  crowd  only  from  fear 
of  their  lives.  But,  of  course,  a real  power  is  one 
which  does  not  follow  after  others,  but  leads  others 
after  itself.  In  fearing  and  listening  to  the  people, 
these  men  showed  that  the  real  power  had  left  them 
and  become  the  property  of  the  people.  Christ  now 
turns  to  them  in  order  to  accuse  them  before  the 
people  of  opposition  to  Himself.  The  whole  purport 
of  the  Gosepl  parable  of  the  husbandmen,  as  you 
yourselves  will  see  directly,  is  to  show  up  the  national 
leaders  of  the  Jews  as  unfit  because  of  their  resistance 
to  the  Messiah.  [He  reads  : ) “ Then  began  He  to 
speak  to  the  people  this  parable  : A certain  man 
planted  a vineyard,  and  let  it  forth  to  husbandmen, 
and  went  into  a far  country  for  a long  time.  And  at 
the  season,  he  sent  a servant  to  the  husbandmen,  that 


122 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


they  should  give  him  of  the  fruit  of  the  vineyard  ; but 
the  husbandmen  beat  him,  and  sent  him  away  empty. 
And  again  he  sent  another  servant : and  they  beat 
him  also,  and  entreated  him  shamefully,  and  sent  him 
away  empty.  And  again  he  sent  a third  : and  they 
wounded  him  also,  and  cast  him  out.  Then  said  the 
lord  of  the  vineyard.  What  shall  I do  ? I will  send 
my  beloved  son : it  may  be  they  will  reverence  him, 
when  they  see  him.  But  when  the  husbandmen 
saw  him,  they  reasoned  among  themselves,  saying, 

‘ This  is  the  heir  ; come,  let  us  kill  him,  that  the 
inheritance  may  be  ours.’  So  they  cast  him  out  of 
the  vineyard,  and  killed  him.  What  therefore  shall 
the  lord  of  the  vineyard  do  unto  them  ? He  shall 
come  and  destroy  these  husbandmen,  and  shall  give 
the  vineyard  to  others.  And  when  they  heard  it, 
they  said,  God  forbid.  And  He  beheld  them,  and 
said,  Wliat  is  this  then  that  is  vHtten,  The  stone 
which  the  builders  rejected,  the  same  is  become  the 
head  of  the  corner  ? Whosoever  shah  fall  upon 
that  stone  shall  be  broken  ; but  on  whomsoever  it 
shall  fall,  it  will  grind  him  to  powder.  And  the  chief 
priests  and  the  scribes  the  same  hour  sought  to  lay 
hands  on  Him ; and  they  feared  the  people ; for  they 
perceived  that  He  had  spoken  this  parable  against 
them.”  Now,  I ask,  about  whom  and  what  was  the 
parable  of  the  husbandmen  spoken  ? 

Prince.- — I do  not  understand  what  is  your  objec- 
tion here  ? The  Jewish  Chief  Priests  and  Scribes 
were  offended  because  they  were  and  acknowledged 
themselves  to  be,  counterparts  of  those  bad  Avorldly 
people  mentioned  in  the  parable. 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


123 


Mr.  Z. — But  of  what,  in  particular,  were  they 
convicted  here  ? 

Prince. — Of  not  fulfilling  the  true  teaching. 

Politician. — It  is  clear  the  scoundrels  lived  like 
mushrooms  for  their  own  pleasure,  they  smoked 
tobacco,  drank  vodka,  ate  carrion  and  also  offered  of 
it  to  their  God,  they  married,  presided  in  law  courts 
and  took  part  in  wars. 

Lady. — Do  you  think  that  it  is  worthy  of  your  age 
and  position  to  mock  in  this  way  ? Do  not  listen  to 
him.  Prince.  We  want  to  speak  seriously  with  you. 
Tell  me  this ; in  the  Gospel  parable,  you  know,  the 
husbandmen  perish  because  they  murdered  the 
owner’s  son  and  heir  — and  this  is  the  main 
thing  according  to  the  Gospel — why  do  you  pass 
over  it  ? 

Prince. — I let  it  pass  because  it  refers  to  the 
personal  fate  of  Christ,  which  no  doubt  has  its  own 
importance  and  interest,  but  all  the  same  is  not 
essential  for  the  one  thing  necessary. 

Lady. — That  is  ? 

Prince. — That  is,  for  the  fulfilment  of  the  Gospel 
teaching,  by  which  the  Kingdom  of  God  and  His 
Righteousness  are  attained. 

Lady. — Wait  a moment ; I have  something  all 
confused  in  my  head — what  exactly  is  it  ? — Yes  [to 
Mr.  Z.),  you  have  the  Gospel  in  your  hands,  so  tell 
us,  please,  what  comes  in  this  chapter  after  the 
parable  ? 

Mr.  Z.  {turning  over  the  leaves  of  the  little  book). — 
There  comes  the  bit  about  rendering  to  Caesar  what 
is  due  to  him,  next  about  the  resurrection  of  the  dead. 


124 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


that  the  dead  will  rise  because  God  is  not  the  God  of 
the  dead  but  of  the  living,  and  after  that,  it  is  proved 
that  Christ  is  not  the  son  of  David  but  the  Son  of 
God — well,  and  the  two  last  verses  are  against  the 
hypocrisy  and  boasting  of  the  Scribes. 

Lady. — There,  you  see.  Prince  ! And  this  also  is 
Gospel  teaching  ; that  we  must  acknowledge  the 
state  in  worldly  matters,  we  must  believe  in  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  also  that  Christ  is  not 
a mere  man  but  the  Son  of  God. 

Prince. — But  how  can  it  be  possible  to  conclude 
this  from  one  chapter  of  uncertain  authorship  and 
date  ? 

Lady. — ^Ah,  no  ! I know  at  once,  and  without 
looking,  that  it  is  not  only  one  chapter,  but  in  all  four 
Gospels  there  is  a great  deal  both  about  the  resur- 
rection and  about  the  Divinity  of  Christ — especially 
in  St.  John,  and  they  read  it  at  funerals. 

Mr.  Z. — But  about  that,  though  it  is  of  uncertain 
authorship  and  date,  still  free  German  criticism  has 
now  acknowledged  that  all  four  Gospels  are  of 
apostolic  origin,  of  the  first  century. 

Politician. — Yes,  and  in  the  thirteenth  edition 
of  “ Vie  de  Jesus  ” I noticed  a recantation  with 
regard  to  the  fourth  Gospel. 

Mr.  Z. — It  is  impossible  to  go  back  upon  our 
teachers.  But  the  great  misfortune.  Prince,  is  that, 
whatever  our  four  Gospels  may  be,  when  and  by 
whom  they  may  have  been  put  together,  there  does 
not  exist  another  gospel  wLich  you  would  find 
more  worthy  of  credit  and  more  harmonious  with 
your  teaching. 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


125 


General. — What ! There  is  not  another  ? But 
there  is  a fifth  in  which  there  is  nothing  about  Christ 
and  only  a teaching  with  reference  to  slaughter  and 
warfare. 

Lady. — Are  you  at  it  too  ? Shame  on  you  ! You 
know  that  the  more  you  and  your  ally,  the  official, 
tease  the  Prince,  the  more  I shall  take  his  part.  I 
am  sure.  Prince,  that  you  wish  to  take  Christianity 
on  its  very  best  side,  and  that  your  Gospel,  though  it 
is  not  the  same  as  ours,  aims  at  that  also ; just  as 
in  old  days  they  wrote  books  called  “ L’Esprit  de  M. 
de  Montesquieu,”  “ L’Esprit  de  Fenelon,”  so  you 
or  your  teachers  have  wished  to  write  ” L’Esprit  de 
ГЁvangile.”  The  pity  is  that  no  one  of  your  way  of 
thinking  has  written  any  book  which  could  be  called 
” The  Spirit  of  Christianity  according  to  the  teaching 
of  So  and  So.”  It  is  essential  for  you  to  have  some- 
thing in  the  way  of  a catechism  in  order  that  we 
simple  people  may  not  lose  the  thread  in  all  these 
intricacies.  At  one  time  we  hear  that  the  main 
point  is  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  at  another  time 
they  suddenly  tell  us  that  before  all  things  it  is 
necessary  to  labour  in  the  sweat  of  one’s  brow  at 
agriculture — though  there  is  nothing  about  that 
in  the  Gospel,  but  it’s  in  Genesis,  in  the  same  place 
as  “in  sorrow  thou  shalt  bring  forth  children  ” — 
but  this  is  not  a commandment,  it  is  only  an  unhappy 
destiny  ; at  another  time  they  say  that  it  is  necessary 
to  give  all  to  the  poor,  and  again  to  give  nothing  to 
anybody,  because  money  is  evil  and  it  is  not  good  to 
do  evil  to  others,  but  only  to  one’s  self  and  one’s 
family,  and  that  for  others  it  is  only  necessary  to 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


126 

labour  ; then  again  they  say  : do  nothing  but  only 
meditate  ; again  they  say  : the  vocation  of  woman 
is  to  bear  as  many  healthy  children  as  possible — but 
then  suddenly — nothing  of  that  is  at  аП  necessary  ; 
next,  not  to  eat  meat  is  the  first  step,  but  why  the  first 
nobody  knows  ; next,  no  vodka  or  tobacco  ; next, 
pancakes  ; and  then  it  is  military  service  that  is  the 
chief  еѵП,  and  the  chief  duty  of  the  Christian  is  to 
refuse  it,  and  anyone  who  is  not  carried  off  for  a 
soldier  is,  of  course,  for  that  reason  a saint.  Perhaps 
I am  talking  nonsense,  but  it’s  not  my  fault.  It  is 
impossible  to  make  all  this  out. 

Prince. — I also  think  it  is  essential  for  us  to  have 
an  intelligent  summing  up  of  the  true  teaching.  I 
fancy  it  is  being  actually  prepared. 

Lady. — Well,  and  while  it  is  being  prepared,  tell 
us  now  in  two  words  what  is  the  essential  point  of  the 
Gospel  in  your  opinion. 

Prince.— It  seems  clearly,  that  it  is  the  great 
principle  of  not  opposing  е\т1  by  force. 

Politician.— And  how  then  will  you  get  rid  of 
tobacco  ? 

Prince. — Get  rid  of  tobacco  ? 

Politician. — Ob  ! Good  heavens  ! WTat  con- 
nection is  there,  I ask,  between  the  principle  of  non- 
resistance  to  evil  and  the  demand  of  abstinence  from 
tobacco,  wine,  meat,  and  sexual  intercourse  ? 

Prince. — The  connection,  I think,  is  clear  : all 
these  vicious  habits  stupefy  a man — they  overpower 
in  him  the  demands  of  his  reason  or  conscience. 
This  is  why  soldiers  generally  go  off  drunk  to 
war. 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


127 


Mr.  Z. — Particularly  to  an  unsuccessful  war.  But 
we  can  leave  that.  The  principle  of  non-resistance 
to  evil  is  important  in  itself ; does  it  justify  or  not 
ascetic  demands  ? According  to  you,  if  we  cease  to 
resist  evil  by  force,  then  evil  will  at  once  disappear. 
That  means,  it  subsists  only  through  our  resistance, 
or  in  consequence  of  the  means  we  take  against  it, 
but  it  has  no  real  strength  of  its  own.  In  reality 
there  is  no  evU,  it  appears  only  in  consequence  of  our 
false  theory  in  supposing  that  evil  exists  and  in  acting 
on  that  supposition.  Is  it  not  so  ? 

Prince. — Of  course  it  is. 

Mr.  Z. — But  if  in  reality  there  is  no  evil  how 
do  you  explain  the  surprising  failure  of  the  work  of 
Christ  in  history  ? From  your  point  of  view,  it  has 
not  altogether  succeeded,  as  after  all  nothing  came 
of  it,  or  rather  there  came  of  it  in  every  case  much 
more  harm  than  good. 

Prince. — How  so  ? 

Mr.  Z. — What  a strange  question  ! Well,  if  this 
is  unintelligible  to  you,  we  will  go  into  it  in  detail. 
Christ,  even  according  to  you,  preached  true  good 
more  clearly,  forcibly  and  consistently  than  anyone. 
Is  it  so  ? 

Prince. — Yes. 

Mr.  Z.' — And  true  good  consists  in  not  opposing 
evil  with  force,  that  is,  so-called  evil,  since  there  is 
no  actual  evil. 

Prince. — Yes. 

Mr.  Z. — Christ  not  only  preached,  but  Himself 
fulfilled  to  the  end  the  demands  of  this  good, 
undergoing  without  resistance  a death  of  torment. 


128 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


Christ,  according  to  you,  died  and  did  not  rise  again. 
Very  well.  After  His  example  many  thousands  of 
His  followers  endured  the  same.  Very  weU.  And 
what,  in  your  opinion,  was  the  result  of  all  this  ? 

Prince. — Would  you  wish  that  some  shining 
angels  should  set  garlands  on  these  martyrs  and 
place  them  somewhere  in  tents  in  the  gardens  of 
Paradise  as  a reward  for  their  heroism  ? 

Mr.  Z. — No,  why  do  you  ask  that  ? Of  course, 
both  you  and  I,  I dare  say,  would  wish  for  all  our 
dear  ones,  both  living  and  dead,  the  very  best  and 
most  pleasant  thing  possible.  But  we  are  not  con- 
cerned with  our  own  desires,  but  with  what  you 
think  actually  resulted  from  the  preaching  and 
heroic  acts  of  Christ  and  His  followers. 

Prince. — Resulted  for  whom  ? For  them  ? 

Mr.  Z. — WeU,  for  them  doubtless  the  result  was  a 
death  of  torment ; but  they,  of  course,  in  their  moral 
heroism,  submitted  to  it  wiUingly  and  not  in  order 
to  receive  shining  crowns  for  themselves,  but  in  order 
to  remit  real  good  to  others,  to  aU  mankind.  So  this 
is  what  I ask  you,  what  good  did  the  heroic  mart\T- 
dom  of  these  people  do  to  others,  to  aU  mankind  ? 
According  to  an  old  sa3dng,  the  blood  of  the  martjnrs 
is  the  seed  of  the  Church.  This  is  true  to  fact,  but 
in  your  opinion  the  Church  brought  about  such  a 
distortion  of  true  Christianity  that  it  was  forthwith 
quite  forgotten  among  men,  and  after  eighteen 
centuries  it  aU  had  to  be  recovered  from  the  begin- 
ning without  any  guarantee  of  better  success,  that  is, 
in  an  altogether  hopeless  way. 

Prince.- — Why  hopeless  ? 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


129 


Mr.  Z. — Well,  I suppose  you  do  not  deny  that 
Christ  and  the  first  generations  of  Christians  put  all 
their  whole  soul  into  the  thing  and  gave  up  their 
lives  for  it,  and  if,  nevertheless,  there  was  no  result, 
as  you  suppose,  then  on  what  can  you  base  any 
hopes  of  a different  outcome  ? There  is  only  one 
undoubted  and  permanent  end  of  all  this  matter, 
which  is  absolutely  the  same  whether  for  those  who 
originate  it,  or  for  those  who  distort  and  ruin  it, 
or  for  those  who  recover  it ; they  all,  according 
to  you,  died  in  the  past,  they  die  in  the  present, 
they  will  die  in  the  future,  and  out  of  good 
actions,  out  of  true  preaching,  nothing  except  death 
ever  did  happen,  does  happen,  or  promises  to 
happen.  What  then  does  it  all  come  to  ? What 
an  eccentricity  ; evil  which  is  non-existent  always 
triumphs,  and  good  always  relapses  into  nothing- 
ness. 

Lady. — Do  the  bad  people  then  not  die  ? 

Mr.  Z. — Very  much  so,  but  the  point  is,  that  by 
the  kingdom  of  death  the  strength  of  evil  only  is 
confirmed,  while  the  strength  of  good,  on  the  con- 
trary, is  disproved.  And,  indeed,  evil  is  obviously 
stronger  than  good,  and  if  the  obvious  counts  as  the 
only  real  thing,  then  one  must  reckon  the  world  as  a 
fundamentally  evil  affair.  But  how  people  can  grow 
wise  while  standing  exclusively  on  the  ground  of 
obvious  and  current  reality,  and  consequently 
acknowledging  the  obvious  preponderance  of  evil 
over  good,  and  at  the  same  time  assert  that  there  is 
no  evil,  and  that  consequently  there  is  no  need  to 
struggle  with  it — that  is  a thing  that  I with  my 


w.c. 


к 


130 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


intellect  do  not  understand,  and  I am  looking  for 
help  from  the  side  of  the  Prince. 

Politician.  —Well,  to  begin  with,  tell  us  your  way 
out  of  the  difficulty. 

Mr.  Z. — It  seems  to  me  simple.  Evil  in  fact 
exists,  and  it  is  expressed  not  in  a mere  absence  of 
good,  but  in  a positive  opposition  and  preponderance 
of  lower  qualities  over  high  in  all  the  provinces  of 
existence.  There  is  individual  evil — it  expresses 
itself  in  the  fact  that  the  lower  side  of  man,  the 
bestial  and  brutal  passions,  resist  the  better  ten- 
dencies of  the  soul,  and  overcome  them  in  an  enormous 
majority  of  people.  There  is  general  evil — consist- 
ing in  the  fact  that  the  popular  crowd,  being  as 
individuals  enslaved  by  evU,  opposes  the  salutary 
efforts  of  the  few  better  people  and  overcomes  them. 
There  is,  lastly,  physical  evU  in  man— in  that  the 
lower  material  elements  of  his  body  oppose  the  vital 
and  living  force  that  joins  them  together  in  the 
beautiful  form  of  the  organism,  and  break  up 
this  form  by  destroying  the  effective  foundation  of 
everything  higher.  This  is  the  extreme  evil  called 
death  ; and  if  it  were  necessary  to  acknowledge  the 
victory  of  this  extreme  physical  evil  as  final  and 
absolute,  then  it  would  be  impossible  to  count  as 
serious  progress  any  so-caUed  victories  of  good  in  the 
province  of  personal  or  general  morality.  Even  if 
we  suppose  that  a man  of  good,  Socrates,  let  us  say, 
triumphed  not  only  over  his  inward  enemies — the 
bad  passions — but  that  he  also  succeeded  in  con- 
vincing and  reforming  his  public  enemies,  and  in 
transforming  Greek  politics — what  advantage  is  this 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


13 1 

ephemeral  and  superficial  victory  over  evil,  if  evil 
triumphs  finally  in  the  deepest  stratum  of  existence 
over  the  very  foundations  of  life  ? Both  to  the 
reformer  and  to  the  reformed  there  is  one  and  the 
same  end — death.  How  could  one  logically  put  a 
high  value  on  the  moral  victories  of  the  Socratic 
good  over  the  moral  microbes  of  bad  passions  in  his 
own  breast,  and  over  the  public  microbes  of  the 
market  place  of  Athens,  if  the  real  victory  was  found 
to  lie  with  the  far  worse,  lower,  coarser  microbes  of 
physical  decomposition  ? Then  no  moral  formula 
could  protect  us  against  extreme  pessimism  and 
despair. 

Politician. — We  have  already  heard  that.  But, 
for  you,  what  is  there  to  rely  on  against  despair  ? 

Mr.  Z.  — We  have  one  thing  to  rely  on — an  actual 
resurrection.  We  know  that  the  struggle  of  good 
with  evil  takes  place  not  only  in  the  soul  and  in 
society,  but  lower  down  in  the  physical  world.  As 
to  that  we  already  know  up  to  now  of  one  victory 
gained  by  the  good  element  in  life — in  the  personal 
resurrection  of  One,  and  we  look  for  future  victories 
in  the  collective  resurrection  of  all.  So  even  evil 
finds  its  explanation,  or  the  final  exposition  of  its 
existence  in  the  fact  that  it  wholly  conduces  to 
greater  and  greater  triumph,  realisation,  and  rein- 
forcement of  good  ; if  death  is  stronger  than  mortal 
life,  then  the  resurrection  to  eternal  life  is  stronger 
than  the  one  or  the  other.  The  Kingdom  of  God  is 
the  kingdom  of  life,  triumphing  through  resurrection 
over  life,  wherein  is  actual,  realised  and  final  good. 
In  that  Kingdom  is  all  the  power  and  all  the  work  of 


к 2 


132 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


Christ,  in  it  is  His  effective  love  to  us  and  ours  to 
Him.  Everything  else  is  merely — conditions,  ways, 
methods.  If  there  is  no  belief  in  the  accomplished 
resurrection  of  One,  and  no  hope  of  a future  resur- 
rection of  all,  you  can  only  talk  in  word  about  any 
sort  of  Kingdom  of  God,  but  in  fact  there  stands  out 
only  a kingdom  of  death. 

Prince. — How  is  that  ? 

Mr.  Z. — Well,  you  not  only  admit  (as  everyone 
does),  the  fact  of  death,  i.e.,  the  fact  that  people  in 
general  have  died,  do  die,  and  still  will  die — but  you 
further  exalt  this  into  an  absolute  law,  to  which 
there  is  no  single  exception,  and  you  hold  that  this 
is  the  world  in  which  death  is  for  ever  an  absolute 
law.  Then  how  can  you  call  this  world  anything 
except  a kingdom  of  death  ? And  what  is  your 
Kingdom  of  God  on  earth  except  an  arbitrary  and 
vain  euphemism  for  the  kingdom  of  death  ? 

Politician. — I also  think  it  is  vain,  because  you 
must  not  change  a known  magnitude  into  an  un- 
known. No  one  has  ever  seen  God,  and  what  kind 
of  a Kingdom  His  may  be — is  unknown  to  anyone  ; 
but  the  death  of  people  and  animals  we  have  all 
seen  and  we  know  it  as  the  supreme  power  in  the 
world  from  which  no  one  can  escape.  So  what  is  the 
good  of  putting  instead  of  this  a,  some  sort  of  an  x ? 
You  will  accomplish  nothing  by  this,  except  it  be 
the  confusing  and  deluding  of  your  “ small  people.” 

Prince. — I do  not  understand  what  we  are  now 
discussing.  Death  is  a phenomenon,  certainly  very 
interesting,  you  can  if  you  like  call  it  a law,  as  being 
a phenomenon  constant  amongst  earthly  creatures 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


133 


and  unavoidable  by  any  of  them  ; you  can  also 
speak  of  the  absoluteness  of  that  law,  since,  hitherto, 
there  has  been  no  clearly  established  exception  ; 
but  what  real  or  vital  importance  can  all  that  have 
for  the  true  Christian  teaching,  which  speaks  to  us 
through  our  conscience  only  about  one  thing ; 
namely,  what  we  ought  and  what  we  ought  not  to  do 
here  and  now  ? It  is  clear  that  the  voice  of  conscience 
can  refer  only  to  that  which  it  is  in  our  power  to  do 
or  not  to  do.  Therefore,  conscience  not  only  says 
nothing  to  us  about  death,  but  cannot  say  any- 
thing. With  all  its  immense  importance  for  our 
human  earthly  feelings  and  desires,  death  is  not 
subject  to  our  will  and  therefore  it  cannot  have  any 
moral  importance  for  us.  In  that  respect^ — and  that 
is  the  only  thing  of  importance  at  the  moment — 
death  is  a purely  indifferent  fact,  just  as  much  as 
bad  weather,  for  example.  Because  I acknowledge 
the  inevitable  periodical  occurrence  of  bad  weather 
and  more  or  less  suffer  from  it,  am  I therefore  bound 
to  say,  instead  of  the  Kingdom  of  God,  the  kingdom 
of  bad  weather  ? 

Mr.  Z. — No,  you  are  not ; in  the  first  place, 
because  bad  weather  has  its  kingdom  only  in 
Petersburg  and  we  have  come  here  with  you  to  the 
Mediterranean  and  laugh  at  its  kingdom  ; and 
secondly,  your  simile  does  not  fit  because  one  can 
praise  God  even  in  bad  weather  and  feel  one’s  self  in 
His  Kingdom,  while  the  dead,  as  is  said  in  the  Scrip- 
tures, praise  not  God ; also  because,  as  his  Excellency 
remarked,  it  is  more  suitable  to  call  this  sorrowful 
world  the  kingdom  of  death  than  the  Kingdom  of  God 


134 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


Lady. — Well,  now  you  are  all  on  names — this  is 
tedious.  Is  it  then  a matter  of  names  ? Tell  us 
instead,  please,  what  you  really  understand  by  the 
Kingdom  of  God  and  His  Righteousness  ? 

Prince. — I understand  a condition  of  people  in 
which  they  act  only  with  a clear  conscience  and  so 
fulfil  the  will  of  God,  which  enjoins  on  them  only 
one  clear  good. 

Mr.  Z. — But  further,  the  voice  of  conscience, 
according  to  you,  speaks  only  about  the  fulfilment 
of  duty  now  and  here. 

Prince. — Of  course. 

Mr.  Z. — Well,  but  is  it  the  case  that  your  con- 
science is  entirely  silent  about  a breach  of  duty  that 
you  were  guilty  of,  let  us  say  in  your  youth,  uath 
regard  to  people  now  long  dead  ? 

Prince. — In  that  case,  the  point  of  these  re- 
minders is  in  this  : that  I should  not  do  anything  of 
that  sort  now. 

Mr.  Z. — Well,  that’s  not  quite  so,  but  it’s  not  worth 
while  quarrelling  about.  I only  want  to  remind  you 
of  another  and  more  incontestable  sphere  of  con- 
science. Long  ago  the  moralists  compared  the  voice 
of  conscience  to  that  genius  or  demon  which  accom- 
panied Socrates,  warning  him  against  undutiful 
conduct,  but  never  pointing  out  positively  what  he 
ought  to  do.  Exactly  the  same  thing  may  be  said 
of  conscience. 

Prince. — How  is  that  so  ? Does  not  conscience 
then  suggest  to  me,  for  example,  that  I should  help 
my  neighbour  when  I know  he  is  in  a position  of 
want  or  danger  ? 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


135 


Mr.  Z. — It  is  very  pleasant  to  hear  this  from  you. 
But,  if  you  analyse  carefully  such  a position  you  will 
see  that  the  role  of  conscience,  even  here,  proves  to 
be  entirely  negative  ; it  demands  of  you  merely 
that  you  should  not  remain  inactive  or  indifferent 
in  face  of  someone  else’s  need,  but  how  precisely  you 
ought  to  act  on  his  behalf,  conscience  itself  does  not 
tell  you. 

Prince. — Just  so,  because  this  depends  on  the 
circumstances  of  the  case,  on  my  position  and  on 
that  of  the  man  I ought  to  help. 

Mr.  Z. — Of  course,  but  the  estimate  and  con- 
sideration of  these  circumstances  and  conditions  is 
not  the  business  of  the  conscience  but  of  the  mind. 

Prince. — But  how  is  it  possible  to  separate 
reason  from  conscience  ? 

Mr.  Z. — To  separate  them  is  not  necessary  ; but 
you  must  distinguish,  and  for  this  reason,  because 
in  reality  there  sometimes  arises  not  only  separation, 
but  opposition  between  the  mind  and  the  conscience. 
If  they  were  one  and  the  same,  then  in  what  way 
would  the  intellect  be  able  to  be  of  service  in 
matters  not  only  foreign  to  morality,  but  directly 
immoral  ? But  you  know  this  happens.  Of  course, 
it  is  possible  to  give  help,  acting  from  the  mind  and 
not  from  the  conscience  ; for  example,  supposing  I 
give  food  and  drink  and  show  every  kindness  to  a 
necessitous  man  in  order  to  make  him  an  accomplice 
such  as  I require  for  the  successful  execution  of  some 
sort  of  swindle  or  other  bad  deed. 

Prince. — Well,  yes,  this  is  elementary.  But  what 
do  you  deduce  therefrom  ? 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


136 

Mr.  Z. — Why  this.  If  the  voice  of  conscience, 
with  all  its  proper  significance  as  a warner  and  re- 
proacher,  does  not  give  positive  practical  and  definite 
directions  for  our  action,  and  our  free  vdll  stands  in 
need  of  the  mind  as  an  assisting  instrument,  and  if 
meanwhile  the  mind  shows  itself  to  be  a doubtful 
servant  for  it,  since  it  is  capable  and  ready  to 
serve  two  masters — good  and  evil — then  for  the 
fulfilment  of  the  will  of  God  and  the  attaining  of  the 
Kingdom  of  God,  besides  the  conscience  and  the 
mind,  yet  a certain  third  thing  is  necessary. 

Prince. — What  is  that  in  your  opinion  ? 

Mr.  Z. — To  put  it  shortly,  it  is  the  inspiration  of 
good,  or  a direct  and  positive  action  of  the  best 
principle  upon  us  and  in  us.  In  such  a joint  action, 
both  mind  and  conscience  become  trusty  helpers 
of  the  good  itself,  and  morality,  instead  of  being 
a good  behaviour,  which  is  always  questionable, 
becomes  an  unquestionable  life  lived  in  the  good 
itself — becomes  the  organic  development  and  com- 
pletion of  the  whole  of  man — within  and  without, 
individual  and  society,  people  and  mankind,  so  as  to 
come  to  its  climax  in  a living  unity  formed  of  the 
revived  past  together  with  the  evolving  future  in  the 
eternal  present  of  the  Kingdom  of  God,  w’hich  will 
indeed  be  on  earth,  but  only  on  a new  earth  which  is 
lovingly  united  to  a new  heaven. 

Prince. — I have  nothing  against  such  poetical 
metaphors,  but  wKy  do  you  suppose  that  people  who 
are  fulfilling  the  will  of  God  according  to  the  Gospel 
commandments  lack  what  you  call  the  inspiration 
of  good  ? 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


137 


Mr.  Z. — Partly  because  I do  not  see  in  them  any 
active  signs  of  that  inspiration,  any  free,  excessive 
transports  of  love — because,  you  know,  God  giveth 
not  the  spirit  by  measure — also,  I do  not  see  a jo5dul 
and  contented  repose  arising  from  a sense  of  possess- 
ing these  gifts,  though  only  in  an  elementary  form ; 
but  chiefly  I presuppose  in  you  a lack  of  the  religious 
inspiration,  because  in  your  opinion  it  is  unneces- 
sary. If  the  good  consists  solely  in  the  fulfilment 
of  “ a will  ” where  is  there  any  room  left  for  inspira- 
tion ? A rule  when  once  for  all  laid  down  is  definite 
and  identical  for  all.  He  who  gave  the  rule  died 
long  ago,  and  according  to  you  did  not  rise,  and 
for  us  He  has  no  personal  living  existence ; but  an 
absolute  primordial  good  presents  itself  to  you,  not 
as  the  father  of  lights  and  spirits,  who  can  directly 
enlighten  and  inspire  you,  but  as  a calculating  master 
who  has  sent  you,  a hireling,  to  work  in  his  vine- 
yard, while  he  himself  lives  somewhere  away  and 
sends  to  you  from  there  for  his  fruits. 

Prince. — You  seem  to  think  that  we  invented  this 
figure  arbitrarily. 

Mr.  Z. — No,  but  you  arbitrarily  see  in  it  the  highest 
force  of  the  relation  between  man  and  God  in  arbi- 
trarily excluding  from  the  Gospel  text  the  very 
substance  of  it.  Which  is  to  point  to  the  son  and 
heir  in  whom  is  found  the  true  living  t5фe  of  the 
relation  between  God  and  man.  It  is  a case  of  a 
master,  obligations  to  a master,  and  the  will  of  a 
master.  But  this  is  what  I have  to  say  to  you  in 
reply  : As  long  as  your  master  only  lays  obligations 
upon  you,  and  claims  from  you  the  fulfilment  of 


І38 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


his  will,  I do  not  see  how  you  can  prove  to  me  that 
this  master  is  a real  master  and  not  an  impostor. 

Prince. — That’s  very  nice,  and  supposing  I know, 
both  in  conscience  and  reason,  that  the  demands  of 
the  master  are  simply  expressive  of  the  purest  form 
of  good. 

Mr.  Z. — I am  sorry  ; I am  not  speaking  of  that. 
I do  not  dispute  that  the  master  demands  good  of 
you  ; but  does  it  follow  that  he  is  himself  good  ? 

Prince. — Why,  how’s  that  ? 

Mr.  Z. — How  strange.  I always  thought  that 
the  quality  of  goodness  in  anybody  is  not  shown  by 
what  he  demands  of  others  but  by  what  he  does  him- 
self. If  this  is  not  clear  to  you  logically,  then  here’s 
an  actual  historical  example  for  you.  The  Muscovite 
Tsar  Ivan  IV.,  in  his  well-known  letter,  demanded 
of  Prince  Andrew  Kurbscki  that  he  should  display 
the  greatest  good  and  highest  moral  heroism  by 
refusing  resistance  to  evil  and  simply  submitting 
himself  to  a martyr’s  death  for  the  truth.  This 
will  of  the  master  was  good  in  what  it  demanded  of 
another,  only  it  did  not  in  any  way  prove  that  the 
master  who  demanded  such  good  was  himself  good. 
It  is  clear  that,  although  mart5ndom  for  the  truth 
is  the  highest  moral  good,  yet  this  does  not  imply 
anything  in  defence  of  Ivan  IV.,  seeing  that  he 
was  in  this  instance  not  the  martyr  but  the  cause  of 
martyrdom. 

Prince. — What  do  you  mean  by  this  ? 

Mr.  Z. — I mean,  that  so  long  as  you  do  not  show 
me  the  good  quality  of  your  master  in  his  own  deeds, 
but  only  in  his  verbal  instructions  to  his  workmen. 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


139 


I remain  of  my  opinion  that  this  far-away  master  of 
yours,  demanding  good  of  others,  but  doing  nothing 
good  himself,  imposing  obligations,  but  showing  no 
love,  never  appearing  for  you  to  see,  but  living  some- 
where away  incognito — that  he  is  none  other  than 
the  God  of  this  world  . . . 

General. — What  an  accursed  incognito  ! 

Lady. — Ah,  do  not  say  so  ! How  terrible  ! The 
Power  of  the  Cross  defend  us.  {She  crosses  her- 
self.) 

Prince. — It  was  possible  earlier  on  to  foresee 
something  of  this  kind. 

Mr.  Z. — I have  no  doubt.  Prince,  that  you, 
through  an  honest  mistake,  accept  a clever  impostor 
as  the  true  God.  The  cleverness  of  the  impostor  is, 
for  you,  a great  extenuating  circumstance  ; I myself 
have  not  analysed  how  the  matter  stands  ; but  at 
present  I have  no  doubt  whatever,  and  you  will 
understand  with  what  feelings  I must  regard  what  I 
consider  to  be  a deceitful  and  seductive  personal 
good. 

Lady. — This,  you  know,  is  rather  insulting. 

Prince. — I assure  you  I am  not  in  the  least 
offended.  A general  and  very  interesting  question 
was  put,  and  it  is  strange  to  me  that  my  interlocutor 
apparently  imagines  that  this  question  has  to  do 
with  me  only,  and  not  with  himself  as  well.  You 
demand  of  me  that  I should  show  you  the  really  good 
deeds  of  my  master,  which  are  witnesses  of  the  fact 
that  he  is  the  origin  of  good  and  not  evil.  Well, 
will  you  yourselves  show  me  any  good  deed  of  your 
master  which  I would  not  be  able  to  ascribe  to  mine  ? 


140 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


General. — You  know,  one  deed  has  already  been 
shown  upon  which  all  the  others  rest. 

Prince. — What  exactly  ? 

Mr.  Z. — The  real  victory  over  evil  in  a real  resur- 
rection. Only  by  this,  I repeat,  is  revealed  the  true 
Kingdom  of  God.  For  without  that  there  is  only  the 
kingdom  of  death  and  sin,  and  of  their  creator,  the 
devil.  The  resurrection — only  not  in  a figurative  sense, 
but  in  a real  one — that  is  the  proof  of  the  true  God. 

Prince. — Yes,  if  it  pleases  you  to  believe  in  such 
mythology.  I,  you  know,  ask  you  for  facts  which  are 
capable  of  proof  and  not  for  your  beliefs. 

Mr.  Z. — Not  so  fast.  Prince.  We  both  start  from 
one  faith,  or,  if  you  like,  one  mythology — only  I 
pursue  it  to  the  end,  while  you,  in  spite  of  logic, 
remain  arbitrarily  at  the  beginning  of  the  way.  Y ou 
admit  the  power  of  good  and  its  ultimate  triumph  on 
earth,  don’t  you  ? 

Prince. — I admit  it. 

Mr.  Z. — What  is  it ; fact  or  belief  ? 

Prince. — Reasonable  belief. 

Mr.  Z. — Let  us  see.  Reason,  as  we  were  taught 
in  the  Seminary,  demands,  among  other  things,  that 
nothing  is  to  be  admitted  without  adequate  founda- 
tion. Tell  me,  then,  please,  upon  what  adequate 
foundation,  having  admitted  the  power  of  good  in 
moral  improvement  and  in  the  perfecting  of  man  and 
humanity,  you  admit  that  good  is  powerless  against 
death  ? 

Prince. — I think  it  is  necessary  for  you  to  say  why 
you  ascribe  to  good  some  sort  of  power  beyond  the 
confines  of  the  moral  sphere. 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY  141 

Mr.  Z. — I will  tell  you.  When  once  I believe  in 
good,  and  in  its  peculiar  power,  and  that  the  very 
conception  of  this  good  power  implies  its  actual  and 
absolute  superiority,  then  I logically  admit  such  a 
power  as  boundless,  and  nothing  will  prevent  me 
from  believing  in  the  truth  of  the  resurrection  which 
has  been  attested  historically.  Besides,  if  you  had 
said  frankly  from  the  very  beginning  that  the 
Christian  faith  was  nothing  to  you,  that  its  matter 
was  mythological  to  you,  then  I,  of  course,  should 
have  restrained  myself  from  expressing  that  ani- 
mosity to  your  manner  of  thought,  which  I was 
not  able  to  hide  from  you ; for  bearing  animosity 
towards  people  for  their  theoretical  errors  means 
acknowledging  oneself  to  be  small  in  mind,  weak 
in  faith  and  bad  at  heart.  Every  one  who  really 
believes  and  at  the  same  time  is  free  from  an 
excess  of  stupidity,  faint-heartedness  and  heart- 
lessness must  look  with  sincere  goodwill  on  any 
adversary  and  denier  of  religious  truth  who  is 
frank,  open  and,  in  short,  honest.  At  the  present 
time  this  is  such  a rarity  that  it  is  difficult  for  me  to 
tell  you  with  what  special  pleasure  I look  upon  a 
declared  enemy  of  Christianity.  I am  almost  pre- 
pared to  see  in  every  one  of  them  a future  Apostle 
Paul,  while  in  some  zealots  for  Christianity  I in- 
voluntarily seem  to  see  Judas  the  traitor.  But 
you,  Prince,  have  so  openly  declared  yourself  that 
I absolutely  refuse  to  number  you  amongst  the 
present  countless  male  and  female  Judases,  and 
already  I foresee  the  moment  in  which  I shall  feel 
towards  you  the  same  good  disposition  which  many 


142 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


declared  atheists  and  non-Christians  have  aroused 
in  me. 

Politician. — Well,  since  now  it  is  so  happily 
explained  that  neither  these  atheists  and  non- 
Christians  nor  such  " true  Christians  ” as  the  Prince 
here  represent  Antichrist,  the  time  has  come  at  last 
for  you  to  show  us  his  real  portrait. 

Mr.  Z. — ^That’s  what  you  are  after  ! But  are  you 
satisfied  with  even  one  of  the  many  representations 
of  Christ  which  have  been  made  at  any  time  by 
talented  artists  ? I do  not  know  one  representation 
that  is  satisfactory.  I suppose  there  cannot  be  one, 
for  the  reason  that  Christ  is  individual  and  unique 
in  His  way,  and  consequently  an  incarnation  unlike 
any  other  of  His  essential  nature — namely,  good. 
To  represent  this  is  unattainable  by  any  artistic 
genius.  But  the  same  thing  must  be  said  about 
Antichrist.  He  is  likewise  individual  and  unique,  a 
full  and  complete  embodiment  of  evil.  It  is  impos- 
sible to  show  his  portrait.  In  Church  literature  we 
find  only  his  passport,  with  general  and  particular 
remarks. 

Lady.^ — His  portrait  isn’t  necessary.  God  for- 
bid ! You  had  better  explain  why  he  himself  is 
necessary  in  your  opinion,  what  his  work  really  is, 
and  if  he  will  come  soon. 

Mr.  Z. — Well,  I am  able  to  satisfy  you  better  than 
you  think.  Some  years  ago  one  of  my  fellow-students 
in  the  Academy,  who  afterwards  became  a monk, 
when  he  was  dying,  bequeathed  to  me  a manuscript 
of  his  which  he  valued  highly,  but  was  -unviUing  and 
unable  to  print.  He  calls  it,  “A  Short  Narrative 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


143 


about  Antichrist.”  Although  it  takes  the  form  of 
fiction,  or  the  appearance  of  an  historical  picture, 
imagined  in  advance,  this  work,  in  my  opinion, 
gives  all  that  in  the  highest  probability  can  be 
said  about  this  subject  in  accordance  with  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  ecclesiastical  tradition,  and  sound 
reason. 

Politician. — I suppose  it  is  not  the  production 
of  our  acquaintance  Varsonophia  ? 

Mr.  Z. — No,  his  name  was  one  of  far  more  refine- 
ment, Pansophia. 

Politician. — Pan  Sophia.  A Pole  ? 

Mr.  Z. — Not  at  all ; one  of  the  Russian  clericals. 
If  you  will  permit  me  to  go  up  to  my  room  for  a 
moment  I will  bring  this  manuscript  and  read  it 
through.  It  isn’t  long. 

Lady. — Go  by  all  means,  only  do  not  get  lost. 
{While  Mr.  Z.  goes  to  his  room  for  the  manuscript  all 
get  up  and  walk  about  the  garden.) 

Politician. — I do  not  know  what  it  is  ; either  my 
eyesight  is  dimmed  by  old  age,  or  something  has 
happened  in  nature.  Only,  I notice  that  there  are 
now  no  longer  in  any  season,  or  in  any  place,  any 
more  of  those  bright  and  quite  clear  days,  which 
formerly  there  were  in  all  climates.  Take  to-day  ; 
not  a cloud  ; we  are  far  enough  from  the  sea,  and 
yet  everything  as  it  were,  is  covered  with  some- 
thing— something  fine  and  intangible,  and  there 
is  no  absolute  clearness.  Have  you  noticed  it. 
General  ? 

General. — I have  noticed  it  for  many  years. 

Lady. — And  I,  for  this  past  year,  have  begun  to 


144 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


notice  it  also.  Not  only  in  the  air  but  in  the  soul : 
for  here  there  is  no  “ absolute  clearness,”  as  you  say. 
Everywhere  there  is  some  sort  of  alarm,  as  if  it  were 
a foreboding  of  some  evil.  I am  sure  that  you. 
Prince,  feel  the  same  thing. 

Prince. — -No,  I have  noticed  nothing  special.  The 
air  seems  as  usual. 

General. — But  you  are  too  young  to  notice  any 
difference.  You  have  no  means  of  comparison. 
How  can  you  remember  ? But  when  you  look  back 
over  fifty  years  you  feel  something. 

Prince. — I think  the  hrst  supposition  is  correct. 
It  is  a phenomenon  of  weak  eyesight. 

Politician. — We  are  growing  old  undoubtedly ; 
but  neither  is  the  earth  growing  younger  ; a double 
weariness  is  felt. 

General. — More  probably  it  is  the  devil  driving 
a mist  with  his  tail  across  God’s  light.  Also  a sign 
of  Antichrist. 

Lady  {pointing  out  Mr.  Z.,  who  was  descending  the 
terrace). — We  shall  soon  know  аП  about  it. 

{They  all  sit  down  in  their  former  places  and  Mr.  Z. 
begins  to  read  the  manuscript  he  has  brought  with  him.) 


Short  Narrative  about  Antichrist. 

Pan-mongolism  ! Although  the  name  is  wild, 

I find  some  consolation  in  the  soimd, 

A mystical  premonition,  as  it  were. 

Of  the  glorious  providence  of  God. 

Lady.  — Where  does  this  heading  come  from  ? 
Whence  this  epigraph  ? 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


145 


Mr.  Z. — I think,  the  author  wrote  it  himself. 

Lady. — Well,  read  on. 

Mr.  Z.  {reads). — The  twentieth  century  after  the 
birth  of  Christ  was  the  period  of  the  last  great  wars, 
civil  dissension  and  revolutions.  The  very  greatest 
of  foreign  wars  had  as  its  remote  cause,  the  intel- 
lectual movement  of  Pan-mongolism  which  arose  in 
Japan  towards  the  end  of  the  nineteenth  century. 
The  imitative  Japanese,  with  astonishing  rapidity 
and  success  copied  the  material  forms  of  European 
culture  and  adopted  certain  European  ideas  of  a 
lower  order.  Having  learned  from  newspapers  and 
historical  text-books  about  the  existence  in  the 
West  of  Pan-hellenism,  Pan-germanism,  Pan-slavism, 
Pan-islamism,  they  proclaimed  the  great  idea  of 
Pan-mongolism,  which  was  the  gathering  into  one, 
under  their  leadership,  of  all  the  peoples  of  Eastern 
Asia  with  the  object  of  making  a resolute  struggle 
against  foreigners,  that  is  to  say,  Europeans.  Taking 
advantage  of  the  fact  that  Europe  was  engaged  in  a 
final  and  decisive  struggle  with  the  Moslem  world 
in  the  beginning  of  the  twentieth  century,  they 
began  the  realisation  of  a great  plan — first,  the 
occupation  of  Korea,  then  that  of  Peking,  where, 
with  the  help  of  the  progressive  party  in  China  they 
would  depose  the  ancient  Manchurian  dynasty 
and  put  the  Japanese  in  its  place.  The  Chinese 
Conservatives  soon  came  to  an  agreement  with 
them.  They  saw  that  of  two  evils  it  was 
better  to  choose  the  lesser  and  therefore,  blood 
being  thicker  than  water,  they  necessarily  chose 
their  brothers  the  Japanese. 


w.c. 


L 


146 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


The  government  of  China  had  not  the  power 
to  hold  its  ground  and  would  have  unavoidably 
become  subject  either  to  the  Europeans  or  to  the 
Japanese.  But  it  was  clear  that  the  Japanese 
sovereignty,  abolishing  the  external  forms  of 
Chinese  dominion  which  seemed  eminently  trivial, 
would  not  affect  the  intimate  foundations  of 
national  life,  whilst  on  the  other  hand  the  pre- 
dominance of  the  European  powers,  who  supported, 
for  political  reasons,  the  Christian  missionaries, 
would  threaten  the  deepest  spiritual  foundations 
of  China.  The  former  national  hatred  of  the 
Chinese  for  the  Japanese  had  arisen  at  a time 
when  neither  the  one  nor  the  other  had 
known  Europeans,  in  the  presence  of  whom  this 
enmity  of  two  related  peoples  became  mere  сі\т1 
dissension,  and  lost  any  significance.  Europeans 
were  entirely  foreigners,  merely  enemies,  and  their 
domination  could  in  no  way  be  flattering  to  race 
pride,  whilst  in  the  hands  of  Japan,  the  Chinese  saw 
the  delightful  lure  of  Pan-mongolism,  which,  more- 
over, in  their  eyes  did  away  udth  the  sad  ine\’it- 
ability  of  European  influence.  “ You  see,  О obsti- 
nate brothers,”  said  the  Japanese,  ” that  we  take 
the  arms  of  the  Western  dogs,  not  from  any  infatua- 
tion for  them,  but  simply  to  beat  them  vdth  their 
own  weapons.  If  you  join  us  and  accept  our  prac- 
tical guidance  we  shall  not  only  quickly  drive  the 
white  devils  our  of  our  Asia,  but  we  shah,  fight  them 
in  their  own  countries  and  found  a real  middle 
kingdom  over  the  whole  world.  You  are  right  in 
your  national  pride  and  contempt  of  Europeans, 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


147 


but  it  is  vain  to  nourish  these  feelings  on  dreams 
alone  without  intelligent  activity.  In  this  we  have 
surpassed  you  and  we  must  show  you  the  way  of 
our  common  welfare.  Otherwise,  see  for  yourselves 
what  your  policy  of  self-assurance  and  distrust  of 
us,  your  natural  friends  and  defenders,  has  given 
you : Russia  and  England,  Germany  and  France 
have  almost  shared  you  between  them,  leaving  you 
nothing,  and  all  your  tigerish  plots  show  only 
the  weak  end  of  a serpent’s  taU.”  Reasonable 
Chinamen  found  this  sound,  and  the  Japanese 
dynasty  pronounced  it  well  founded.  Its  first 
care,  of  course,  was  the  creation  of  a powerful 
army  and  navy.  A great  part  of  the  fighting  forces 
of  Japan  was  brought  to  China,  where  it  composed 
the  staff  of  an  enormous  new  army.  Japanese 
officers  speaking  Chinese  acted  as  instructors  far 
more  successfully  than  the  Europeans  who  had  been 
dismissed,  and  in  the  countless  populations  of  China, 
Manchuria,  Mongolia  and  Tibet  was  found  a suffi- 
ciency of  excellent  military  material.  Already  the 
first  Chinese  Emperor  of  the  Japanese  dynasty  was 
able  to  make  a successful  trial  of  the  arms  of  the 
revived  empire,  driving  out  the  French  from  Tonkin 
and  Siam,  the  English  from  Burma,  and  including 
in  the  Middle  Empire  all  of  Indo-China.  His  heir, 
Chinese  on  his  mother’s  side,  thus  uniting  in  him- 
self both  the  cunning  and  elasticity  of  the  Chinese 
with  the  energy,  mobility  and  enterprise  of  the 
Japanese,  mobilised  in  Chinese  Turkestan  an  army 
of  four  millions,  and  at  the  time  that  the  Tsun-li- 
Yamin  confidently  informed  the  Russian  Ambassador 


148 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


that  this  force  was  intended  for  the  conquest  of  India, 
the  Emperor  appears  in  our  Central  Asia,  and  having 
collected  there  all  the  inhabitants,  moves  swiftly 
across  the  Urals  and  swamps  with  his  armies  all 
Eastern  and  Central  Russia,  whilst  the  Russian 
forces,  hastily  mobilised  in  various  parts,  hurry 
from  Poland,  from  Lithuania,  from  Kiev,  VoUiynia, 
Petersburg  and  Finland.  Owing  to  the  absence  of  a 
prearranged  plan  of  campaign  and  the  enormous 
numerical  superiority  of  the  enemy,  the  fighting 
qualities  of  the  Russian  forces  allow  them  only  to 
perish  with  honour.  The  swiftness  of  the  invasion 
left  no  time  for  the  necessary  concentration,  and 
army  corps  after  army  corps  w'as  exterminated  in 
hard  and  hopeless  conflicts.  The  Mongols  did  not 
come  off  cheaply,  but  they  easily  replaced  their 
losses,  having  control  of  all  the  Asiatic  raihvays, 
while  a Russian  army  of  two  hundred  thousand, 
for  a long  time  concentrated  on  the  Manchurian 
frontier,  made  an  unsuccessful  attempt  to  invade 
a well-defended  China.  Having  left  a part  of  his 
forces  in  Russia  to  prevent  the  forming  of  new 
armies,  and  also  for  the  pursuit  of  guerilla  bands 
which  had  increased  in  number,  the  Emperor  with 
three  armies  crossed  the  German  frontier.  Here 
they  had  succeeded  in  making  preparations,  and  one 
of  the  Mongol  armies  was  annihilated.  At  this  time 
the  party  of  a belated  revanche  was  in  power  in 
France  and  a million  hostile  bayonets  quickly 
appeared  at  the  Germans’  back.  Having  fallen 
between  the  anvil  and  the  hammer,  the  German 
army  was  forced  to  accept  honourable  conditions  of 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


149 


surrender  proposed  by  the  Emperor.  The  jubilant 
French  fraternising  with  the  yellow  faces  were 
scattered  throughout  Germany,  and  soon  lost  every 
appearance  of  military  discipline.  The  Emperor 
commanded  his  soldiers  to  kill  the  more  unnecessary 
of  his  allies,  which  was  accomplished  with  Chinese 
accuracy.  In  Paris  an  uprising  of  working  men  sans 
patrie  took  place,  and  the  capital  of  western  culture 
opened  its  gates  to  the  Conqueror  of  the  East. 
Having  satisfied  his  curiosity,  the  Emperor  set  out 
for  Boulogne,  where,  under  cover  of  the  fleet  which 
had  come  from  the  Pacific,  he  got  ready  transports 
to  convey  his  army  to  Great  Britain.  But  he  was 
in  need  of  money,  and  the  English  bought  their  free- 
dom for  a milliard  pounds.  For  a year  all  the 
European  Powers  acknowledged  themselves  vassals 
of  the  Emperor,  who,  having  left  a sufficient  army  of 
occupation  in  Europe,  returned  to  the  East,  where  he 
began  preparations  for  a naval  expedition  against 
America  and  Australia.  For  half  a century  Europe 
lay  under  the  Mongol  yoke.  In  the  domain  of 
thought  this  epoch  was  remarkable  for  a general 
blending  and  mutual  interchange  of  European  and 
Eastern  ideas,  a repetition  en  grand  of  the  ancient 
Alexandrian  syncritism.  In  the  practical  domain  of 
life,  three  phenomena  became  in  the  highest  degree 
characteristic : the  large  influx  into  Europe  of 
Chinese  and  Japanese  labour,  and  in  consequence  of 
this  the  violent  embitterment  of  the  social-economic 
question  ; the  series  of  palliative  attempts  to  solve 
this  question,  which  were  prolonged  on  the  part  of  the 
governing  classes ; and  the  increasing  international 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


150 

activity  of  secret  social  organisations  which  resulted  in 
a widespread  European  plot  to  drive  out  the  Mongols 
and  to  re-establish  the  independence  of  Europe.  This 
colossal  plot,  into  which  the  local  national  govern- 
ments entered  so  far  as  they  were  able,  being  under 
the  control  of  the  Imperial  viceroys,  was  prepared  in 
a masterly  and  succeeded  in  a brilliant  manner.  At 
an  appointed  time  began  the  slaughter  of  the  Mongol 
soldiers  and  the  murder  and  expulsion  of  the  work- 
men. In  all  places  secret  staffs  of  the  European 
army  appeared,  and  a general  mobilisation  took  place 
according  to  a long-prepared  and  circumstantial 
plan.  The  new  Emperor,  the  grandson  of  the 
great  Conqueror,  hastened  from  China  to  Russia,  but 
here  his  numberless  hordes  were  annihilated  by 
the  all-European  army.  Their  scattered  remnants 
returned  to  the  depths  of  Asia,  and  Europe  became 
free.  If  the  half  century  of  subjugation  to  the 
Asiatic  barbarians  was  the  result  of  the  disunion 
of  the  Powers,  who  thought  only  of  their  separate 
national  interests,  a great  and  glorious  liberation 
was  attained  by  the  international  organisation  of  the 
united  forces  of  all  the  peoples  of  Europe. 

As  a natural  consequence  of  this  obvious  fact  it 
followed  that  the  old  traditional  order  of  divided 
nations  everywhere  lost  its  significance,  and  almost 
everywhere  the  last  traces  of  monarchical  institu- 
tions disappeared.  Europe  in  the  twenty-first 
century  presented  a union  of  more  or  less  demo- 
cratic States — the  United  States  of  Europe.  The 
progress  of  external  culture,  somewhat  retarded  by 
the  Mongol  invasion  and  war  of  liberation,  again 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY  151 

went  forward.  Matters  of  internal  consciousness — 
questions  of  life  and  death,  of  the  last  judgment,  of 
the  world  and  of  mankind,  complicated  and  confused 
by  a multitude  of  new  physiological  and  psycho- 
logical investigations  and  discoveries  remained  as 
formerly,  insoluble.  Only  one  important  negative  • 
result  was  made  clear — the  absolute  fall  of  theoretical 
materialism.  The  representation  of  the  universe  as 
a system  of  floating  atoms,  and  of  life  as  the  result 
of  a mechanical  agglomeration  of  minute  alterations 
of  matter — such  a statement  no  longer  satisfied  even 
one  thinking  being.  Mankind  had  for  ever  outgrown 
this  stage  of  philosophical  youthfulness.  But  it  was 
clear  on  the  other  hand  that  it  had  also  outgrown 
the  youthful  capacity  of  a simple  and  unconscious 
belief.  The  idea  that  God  created  the  universe  out 
of  nothing,  etc.,  ceased  to  be  taught  even  in  the 
primary  schools.  A certain  general  and  higher  level 
of  representing  such  matters  had  been  worked  out, 
below  which  no  dogmatism  could  fall.  And  if  the 
vast  majority  of  thinking  people  remained  entirely 
unbelievers,  the  few  who  believed  became  of  necessity 
“ thinkers,”  fulfilling  the  instructions  of  the  apostle  : 
be  children  at  heart  but  not  in  mind. 

There  was  at  this  time  among  the  few  people 
believing  in  spiritual  things  a remarkable  man — 
called  by  many  a superman — who  was,  however, 
as  far  from  being  intellectual  as  from  being  a child 
at  heart.  He  was  still  young,  but,  thanks  to  his 
great  talent,  at  thirty-three  years  of  age  was  widely 
proclaimed  as  a great  thinker,  writer,  and  social 
worker.  Being  conscious  within  himself  of  great 


152 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


spiritual  power  he  had  been  always  a convinced 
spiritualist,  and  his  clear  understanding  always 
showed  him  the  truth  of  that  in  which  one  must 
believe — Good,  God,  the  Messiah.  In  these  he 
believed,  but  he  loved  only  himself.  He  believed 
in  God,  but,  in  the  depths  of  his  soul,  he  involun- 
tarily and  unconsciously  preferred  himself  to  Him. 
He  believed  in  Good,  but  the  All  Seeing  Eye  of  the 
Eternal  knew  that  this  man  bowed  before  the  power 
of  evil  when  it  offered  him  a bribe — not  by  the  snare 
of  the  senses  and  lower  passions,  nor  even  by  the 
superior  attraction  of  power,  but  through  his  im- 
measurable self-love  alone.  Besides,  this  self-love 
was  neither  an  unconscious  instinct  nor  a foolish 
pretence.  In  view  of  his  exceptional  talent,  his 
beauty,  nobility  of  character,  his  supreme  display 
of  continence,  his  disinterestedness,  and  his  active 
beneficence,  it  seemed  that  his  enormous  self-love 
was  justifiable,  and  vcorthy  of  a great  spiritualist, 
ascetic,  and  philanthropist.  Was  he  to  blame  ? — a 
man  so  plenteously  endowed  with  divine  gifts  that 
he  saw  in  them  special  signs  of  an  exceptional 
affection  from  heaven  for  himself,  and  he  counted 
himself  as  second  to  God  in  his  origin  as  the  only 
son  of  God.  In  a word,  he  avowed  that  he  was,  in 
truth,  Christ.  But  this  consciousness  of  his  super- 
merit, in  effect,  defined  itself  in  him  not  as  any 
moral  obligation  of  his  towards  God  and  the  world, 
but  as  his  right  and  prerogative  to  be  before  others, 
and,  more  than  all,  before  Christ.  He  had  no 
fundamental  enmity  towards  Jesus.  He  recognised 
His  Messianic  significance  and  merit,  and  he  reaUy 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


153 


saw  in  Him  his  own  august  predecessor.  The  moral 
grandeur  and  absolute  oneness  of  Christ  were  not 
understood  by  a mind  clouded  by  self-love.  He 
argued  thus  ; “ Christ  came  before  me  ; I appeared 
next,  but  that  which  appears  later  in  time  is,  in 
reality,  first.  I shall  come  last  at  the  end  of  history 
exactly  because  I am  the  absolute  and  final  saviour. 
The  first  Christ  is  my  forerunner.  His  mission  was 
to  prepare  and  make  ready  for  my  appearance.”  In 
this  sense  the  great  man  of  the  twenty-first  century 
applied  to  himself  all  that  was  said  in  the  Gospel 
about  the  Second  Advent,  proclaiming  that  this 
advent  is  not  a return  of  the  same  Christ  but  a sub- 
stitution of  the  previous  Christ  which  is  final,  that 
is,  he  himself. 

On  this  point  the  coming  man  does  not  yet  offer 
much  that  is  characteristic  or  original.  He  regards 
his  relation  to  Christ  in  the  same  way  as  did,  for 
instance,  Mahomet,  an  upright  man,  whom  it  is 
impossible  to  accuse  of  any  evil  design. 

The  self-loving  preference  of  himself  to  Christ  was 
justified  by  this  man  with  such  an  argument  as 
follows  : “ Christ,  preaching  and  proclaiming  moral 
welfare,  was  the  reformer  of  humanity,  but  I am, 
called  to  be  benefactor  of  humanity  in  part  reformed, 
in  part  unreformed.  I shall  give  to  everyone  all  that 
is  necessary  for  him.  Christ  as  a moralist  divided 
all  people  into  good  and  bad  ; I shall  unite  them  by 
blessings  which  are  necessary  both  to  the  good 
and  the  bad.  I shall  be  the  real  representative  of 
that  God  who  causes  the  sun  to  shine  upon  the  good 
and  the  bad,  and  the  rain  to  fall  upon  the  just  and 


154 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


unjust.  Christ  brought  a sword  ; I shall  bring 
peace.  He  threatened  the  earth  with  a dreadful 
last  judgment.  But  I shah  be  the  final  judge,  and 
my  judgment  will  not  be  a judgment  of  right  only, 
but  of  mercy.  There  wiU  be  justice  in  my  judgment ; 
not  a justice  of  reward,  but  a distributive  justice. 
I shall  make  a distinction  for  all,  and  to  each  one  I 
shall  give  what  is  needful  for  him.” 

And  behold,  in  this  beautiful  frame  of  mind  he 
awaits  some  clear,  divine  call  for  a new  salvation  of 
humanity  ; for  some  clear  and  striking  evidence 
that  he  is  the  eldest  and  beloved  firstborn  Son  of 
God.  He  awaits  and  nourishes  his  being  with  the 
consciousness  of  his  superhuman  beneficence  and 
abilities— and  this,  as  it  has  been  said,  is  a man  of 
irreproachable  morality  and  unusual  talent. 

The  proud  and  just  man  waits  for  the  highest 
sanction  in  order  to  begin  his  salvation  of  humanity 
— but  he  waits  in  vain.  He  has  passed  his  thirtieth 
year  and  still  another  three  years  go  by.  Suddenly 
the  thought  flashes  into  his  mind  and  pierces  to  the 
depths  of  his  brain  with  a burning  shudder,  “ But 
if  ? if  it  is  not  I,  but  that  other — the  Galilean. 
If  He  is  not  my  forerunner,  but  the  real  first 
and  last  ? But  He  must  be  alive — where  is  He  ? 
...  If  He  came  to  me  now  and  here  . . . ^^Ъat 
shall  I say  to  Him  ? I must  bend  low  before 
Him,  as  the  very  simplest  Christian,  and  as  a 
Russian  mouzhik  murmur  stupidly,  ‘ Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  have  mercy  upon  me  a sinner,’  or,  like  an  old 
Polish  woman,  prostrate  mj^self  before  Him,  flat  on 
the  ground.  I,  the  brilliant  genius,  the  superman ! 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


155 


No,  never  ! ” And  in  the  place  of  the  former  reason- 
able and  cold  respect  for  God  and  Christ  there  is  born 
and  grows  up  in  his  heart,  at  first  a sort  of  horror 
and  then  a burning  envy  and  fury  which  seizes  and 
contracts  all  his  being,  a hatred  which  fills  his  soul. 
“ It  is  I,  and  not  He.  He  is  not  alive  and  will  not 
be.  He  has  not.  He  has  not  risen  ! He  is  rotting 
in  the  grave,  rotting  as  the  lost  ...”  With  foam- 
ing mouth  and  convulsive  bounds  he  rushed  from 
the  house  and  the  garden,  and  in  the  heavy,  black 
night  ran  along  the  path  on  the  cliffs.  His  fury  had 
abated  and  a despair,  hard  and  heavy  as  the  cliff, 
gloomy  as  the  night,  had  taken  its  place.  He 
stopped  near  a perpendicular  break  in  the  cliff  and 
listened  to  the  troubled  noise  of  the  water  among 
the  stones  far  below  him.  An  unbearable  sorrow 
crushed  his  heart.  Suddenly  there  was  a movement 
within  him.  ” Shall  I call  upon  Him — shall  I ask 
Him  what  to  do  ? ” And  in  the  midst  of  the  dark- 
ness appeared  a gentle  and  sad  image.  “ He  pities 
me  ! no,  never  ! He  is  not  risen.  He  is  not  risen  ! ” 
And  he  flung  himself  away  from  the  brink.  But 
something  as  elastic  as  a waterspout  carried  him  up 
in  the  air,  and  he  felt  a vibration  as  from  an  electric 
current  when  some  power  hurled  him  back.  For  an 
instant  he  lost  consciousness,  and  when  he  regained 
his  senses  he  found  himself  kneeling  a few  steps 
away  from  the  edge  of  the  cliff.  Before  him  was  the 
outline  of  a figure,  bright  with  a phosphorescent 
misty  radiance,  whose  eyes  with  unbearably  sharp 
brilliancy  pierced  his  soul. 

He  saw  these  two  piercing  eyes  and  heard, 


і5б  WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 

proceeding  neither  from  within  nor  from  without,  a 
strange  voice,  dull,  as  if  smothered,  and,  at  the  same 
time,  precise  and  entirely  soulless,  as  if  it  came  from 
a gramophone.  This  voice  said  to  him  : “ My  well- 
beloved  son,  all  my  affection  is  in  thee.  Why  hast 
thou  sought  me  ? Why  honour  that  other,  the  wicked 
One  and  His  Father.  I am  god  and  thy  father.  The 
other — a beggar  and  crucified  One — is  a stranger  to 
me  and  to  thee.  I have  no  other  son  but  thee.  Thou, 
my  only,  only  begotten,  equal  to  me.  I love  thee 
and  ask  nothing  of  thee.  Thou  art  so  beautiful, 
great  and  powerful.  Act  in  thine  own  name,  not  in 
mine.  I do  not  envy  thee ; I love  thee.  I am  in  need 
of  nothing  from  thee.  He,  whom  thou  didst  deem  a 
god,  demanded  of  His  Son  obedience  and  boimdless 
subservience,  even  to  the  death  of  the  cross,  and  He 
was  unable  to  help  Him  on  the  cross.  I require 
nothing  of  thee,  and  I shall  help  thee.  For  thine 
own  sake  and  the  sake  of  thy  special  worthiness  and 
superiority  and  my  pure,  disinterested  love  to  thee, 
I shall  help  thee.  Receive  my  spirit.  As,  formerly, 
my  spirit  brought  thee  forth  in  beauty,  so  now  let  it 
beget  thee  in  strength.”  At  these  words  of  the 
unknown  the  lips  of  the  superman  parted  wide,  two 
piercing  eyes  approached  closely  to  his  face,  and  he 
felt  as  if  a sharp,  icy  current  was  entering  into  him, 
filling  all  his  being.  Moreover,  he  felt  a marvellous 
strength,  daring,  lightness  and  ecstasy.  At  the 
same  instant  the  shining  countenance  and  the  two 
piercing  eyes  suddenly  disappeared,  and  something 
lifted  the  superman  from  earth  and  dropped  him 
immediately  in  his  garden  near  the  door  of  his  house. 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


157 


On  the  following  day  not  only  the  visitors  of  the 
great  man,  but  even  his  servants,  were  amazed  at 
his  inspired  appearance.  But  they  would  have  been 
still  more  astonished  if  they  had  been  able  to  see 
with  what  supernatural  swiftness  and  easiness  he, 
having  locked  himself  up  in  his  own  study,  wrote 
his  remarkable  work  under  the  title  of  “ The  Open 
Way  to  Universal  Peace  and  Prosperity.” 

The  previous  books  and  general  activities  of  the 
superman  had  met  with  severe  critics,  although  they 
were  for  the  most  part  especially  religious  people, 
and  for  that  reason  had  no  authority  of  any  kind — 
of  course,  I am  speaking  of  the  time  of  the  coming 
of  Antichrist — so  that  not  many  listened  to  them 
when  they  pointed  out,  in  everything  that  the 
“ coming  man  ” wrote  and  said,  the  signs  of  an 
absolutely  exceptional,  intense  self-love  and  conceit, 
with  the  absence  of  true  simplicity,  rectitude  and 
zeal. 

But  by  his  new  work  he  attracted  to  himself 
even  some  of  his  former  critics  and  opponents. 
This  book,  written  after  the  adventure  on  the  cliff, 
showed  in  him  an  unprecedented  power  of  genius. 
It  was  something  all-embracing  and  calculated  to 
reconcile  all  dispute.  In  it  was  united  a noble 
reverence  for  ancient  traditions  and  symbols,  with 
a broad  and  daring  radicalism  in  social-political 
demands  and  requirements  ; a boundless  freedom 
of  thought  with  the  deepest  understanding  of 
all  mysticism,  unconditional  individualism,  with  a 
burning  zeal  for  the  common  good,  the  most  exalted 
idealism  in  guiding  principles,  with  the  complete 


158 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


definiteness  and  vitality  of  practical  solutions. 
And  аП  of  it  was  united  and  connected  with  such 
genius  and  art  that  it  was  easy  for  every  one-sided 
thinker  and  worker  to  see  and  accept  the  whole,  even 
from  his  personal  angle  of  vision,  in  no  way  sacri- 
ficing truth  itself,  not  magnifying  it  effectively  over 
his  “ Ego,”  not  disclaiming  the  practicability  of 
his  one-sidedness  nor  correcting  the  faults  of  his 
outlook  and  aims,  nor  yet  completing  their  short- 
comings. This  wonderful  book  was  at  once  trans- 
lated into  all  the  languages  of  the  civilised — and 
some  of  the  uncivilised — nations.  A thousand 
newspapers  in  аП  parts  of  the  world  were  filled  for 
a whole  year  with  editorial  articles  and  with  the 
raptures  of  the  critics.  Cheap  editions,  with  por- 
traits of  the  author,  were  sold  in  millions  of  copies, 
and  the  whole  of  the  cultured  world — which  at  that 
period  comprised  almost  the  whole  earth — ^^vas  filled 
with  the  fame  of  the  incomparable  great  and  only 
one  ! No  one  made  any  objections  to  this  book — 
it  seemed  to  each  the  revelation  of  entire  truth.  In 
it  such  full  justice  was  done  to  all  the  past,  all 
the  present  was  estimated  so  dispassionately  and 
broadly,  and  the  best  future  was  so  clearly  and 
realistically  described,  that  everyone  said : " Here 
is  the  very  thing  I need  ; this  is  the  ideal  which  is 
not  Utopian  ; this  is  a project  which  is  not  chimeri- 
cal.” And  the  wonderM  author  not  only  attracted 
everyone,  but  he  was  welcome  to  each,  thus  fulfilling 
the  words  of  Christ  : 

“ I am  come  in  My  Father’s  name  and  ye  receive 
Me  not ; if  another  shall  come  in  his  own  name — ^him 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


159 


ye  wUl  receive.”  Of  course,  for  the  latter  to  be 
received  he  must  be  welcome. 

It  is  true,  some  pious  people,  while  warmly 
praising  the  book,  began  to  ask  why  Christ 
was  not  once  mentioned  in  it  ; but  other  Chris- 
tians replied,  '*  God  be  praised  ! Already,  in  past 
centuries,  all  holy  things  have  been  sufficiently 
soiled  by  every  sort  of  unacknowledged  zealot,  and 
now  a deeply  religious  writer  must  be  very  guarded. 
And  if  the  contents  of  a book  are  impregnated 
with  the  truly  Christian  spirit  of  effective  love  and 
universal  benevolence,  what  is  there  left  to  wish  for  ?” 
With  this  aU  agreed.  Soon  after  the  appearance  of 
‘‘  The  Open  Way,”  which  made  its  author  the  most 
popular  of  all  the  people  who  had  lived  in  the  world, 
the  international  constitutional  assembly  of  the 
Union  of  European  States  was  to  meet.  This 
Union,  founded  after  the  series  of  domestic  and 
foreign  wars  which  were  connected  with  the  throwing 
off  of  the  Mongol  yoke,  and  which  considerably 
changed  the  map  of  Europe,  was  faced  with  the 
immediate  danger  of  a collision — not  between  the 
nations,  but  between  political  and  social  parties. 
The  principal  directors  of  general  European  policy 
belonging  to  the  powerful  society  of  Freemasons 
felt  the  lack  of  a common  executive  authority. 
European  unity,  which  had  been  attained  with  such 
difficulty,  was  ready  at  any  moment  to  faU  to  pieces. 
The  federated  council,  or  universal  committee 
{comiU  permanent  universel),  was  not  in  harmony, 
since  not  aU  the  places  were  occupied  by  real  Masons 
devoted  to  the  matter.  Independent  members  of 


ібо 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


the  committee  entered  into  a separate  agreement 
among  themselves,  and  the  matter  threatened  to 
cause  a new  war.  Then  the  ” devoted  ones  ” 
resolved  to  institute  a personal  executive  authority 
of  one  man,  with  full  and  sufficient  powers.  The 
principal  candidate  was  a member  of  the  Order, 
“ the  coming  man.” 

He  was  the  only  person  with  a great  world-wide 
reputation.  Being  by  profession  a clever  officer  of 
artillery,  and  by  his  possessions  a large  capitaUst, 
he  had  friendly  relations  everywhere  in  financial 
and  military  circles.  In  other  and  less  enlightened 
times  the  fact  that  his  origin  was  obscured  by  a 
heavy  mist  of  the  unknown  would  have  militated 
against  him.  His  mother,  a person  of  indulgent 
conduct,  was  well  known  in  both  hemispheres,  but 
too  many  different  people  had  good  reason  to  beUeve 
themselves  his  father.  These  circumstances  naturally 
could  not  have  any  significance  in  a century  so 
much  in  the  van,  that  even  to  him  it  appeared  to  be 
the  last.  The  ” coming  man  ” was  elected  almost 
unanimously  as  life  president  of  the  United  States  of 
Europe.  When  he  appeared  in  the  Tribune,  in  all 
the  glory  of  his  superhuman  youthful  beauty  and 
power,  and  in  an  inspired  discourse  of  great  elo- 
quence expounded  his  universal  programme,  the 
assembly,  enchanted  and  carried  away,  decided, 
in  a burst  of  enthusiasm  and  without  voting,  to 
pay  him  the  highest  honour  by  electing  him  as 
Roman  Emperor.  The  Congress  was  closed  amid 
the  greatest  rejoicing,  and  the  great  man  who  had 
been  chosen  issued  a manifesto  which  began  thus : 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


i6i 


“ Peoples  of  the  earth,  my  peace  I give  to  you,” 
and  ending  with  the  words,  “ Peoples  of  the  earth  ! 
The  promises  have  been  performed.  An  eternal, 
universal  peace  has  been  secured.  Every  attempt 
to  destroy  it  will  meet  with  invincible  resistance. 
For,  from  henceforth,  there  is  one  central  authority 
on  earth,  which  is  stronger  than  all  other  powers 
taken  separately  and  together.  This  invincible, 
all-subduing  authority,  with  all  its  power,  belongs 
to  me,  as  chosen  autocratic  Emperor  of  Europe. 
International  law  has,  at  last,  a sanction  hitherto 
unattained  by  it.  From  henceforth  no  power  will 
dare  to  say  ‘ War  ’ when  I say  it  is  ‘ Peace.’  Peoples 
of  the  earth,  peace  be  to  you ! ” This  manifesto 
produced  the  desired  effect.  Everywhere  outside 
Europe,  especially  in  America,  strong  imperialistic 
parties  were  formed  which  forced  their  governments, 
upon  various  conditions,  to  join  the  United  States  of 
Europe  under  the  supreme  power  of  the  Roman 
Emperor.  There  still  remained  independent  tribes 
and  smaller  powers  somewhere  in  Asia  and  Africa. 
The  Emperor,  with  a small  army,  but  one  chosen 
from  Russian,  German,  Polish,  Hungarian  and 
Turkish  regiments,  accomplished  a march  from 
Eastern  Asia  to  Morocco,  and  without  great  blood- 
shed brought  into  subjection  all  who  were  dis- 
obedient. He  established  viceroys  in  all  the 
countries  of  both  hemispheres,  men  of  Euro- 
pean education  and  native  magnates  devoted  to 
himself.  The  population  of  all  pagan  countries  was 
dumbfounded,  but  at  the  same  time  enchanted, 
and  proclaimed  him  a great  god.  In  one  year,  in  a 


w.c. 


M 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


162 

real  and  accurate  sense,  he  founded  a universal  mon- 
archy. All  tendencies  to  war  were  eradicated.  The 
League  of  Universal  Peace  met  for  the  last  time, 
and  having  published  an  enthusiastic  panegyric  on 
the  great  peace  maker,  abolished  itself  as  unneces- 
sary. In  the  second  year  of  his  reign  the  Roman 
and  Universal  Emperor  issued  a new  manifesto. 
“ Peoples  of  the  earth,  I promised  you  peace  and  I 
have  given  it  you.  But  peace  is  beautiful  only 
when  coupled  with  prosperity.  He  who  in  time  of 
peace  is  threatened  with  the  misfortune  of  poverty, 
does  not  find  peace  a joy.  Now,  let  all  who  are 
cold  and  hungry  come  to  me,  so  that  I may  лѵапп 
them  and  feed  them.’  Afterwards  he  announced 
a simple  and  aU-embracing  social  reform  which, 
already  stated  in  his  book,  had  there  captivated  all 
noble  and  sober  minds.  At  present,  thanks  to  the 
concentration  in  his  hands  of  the  world’s  finance  and 
of  a colossal  amount  of  landed  property,  he  was  able 
to  realise  this  reform  according  to  the  wishes  of  the 
poor,  and  without  sensibly  offending  the  rich.  Every- 
one began  to  receive  in  proportion  to  his  ability, 
and  every  ability  according  to  its  labour  and  merit. 

The  new  lord  of  the  earth  was,  before  all  things, 
a tender-hearted  philanthropist,  and  not  only  a 
philanthropist  but  a philosopher.  He  himself  was 
a vegetarian.  He  forbad  vdvisection,  and  instituted 
a strict  watch  over  slaughter-houses.  The  society 
for  the  protection  of  animals  was  encouraged  by 
him  in  every  way.  But  more  important  than  all 
these  details  was  the  solid  establishment  among  all 
mankind  of  the  most  fundamental  equaUty — an 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


163 


equality  of  general  repletion.  This  was  accomplished 
in  the  second  year  of  his  reign.  The  social-political 
question  was  definitely  settled.  But  if  repletion  be 
the  first  interest  of  hungry  people,  such  people, 
when  once  replete,  want  something  more.  Even 
animals,  when  replete,  usually  want  not  only  to 
sleep,  but  to  play.  Much  more  than  they,  do 
human  beings,  who  at  all  times,  post  panem, 
have  demanded  cir censes. 

The  Emperor-superman  understood  what  was 
necessary  for  his  people.  At  this  time  a great 
magician  from  distant  Orient  came  to  him  in  Rome 
wrapped  in  a thick  cloud  of  strange  happenings  and 
curious  tales.  It  was  generally  believed  among  the 
Neo-Buddhists  that  he  was  of  divine  origin — a son 
of  the  sun  god  Surga  and  of  a water  nymph. 

This  magician,  Apollyon  by  name,  was  a man 
undoubtedly  talented,  half  Asiatic,  half  European, 
a Catholic  bishop  in  partibus  infidelium,  who,  while  he 
was  to  an  astonishing  degree  in  possession  of  the 
latest  results  of  Western  science  and  of  its  technical 
application,  also  united  with  this  the  knowledge  of  all 
that  is  really  sound  and  significant  in  the  traditional 
mysticism  of  the  Orient  and  the  skill  to  make  use  of  it. 
The  results  of  such  a combination  were  astounding. 
Apollyon  had  attained,  amongst  other  things,  the  skill 
at  once,  half  scientific,  half  magical,  of  attracting 
and  directing  atmospheric  electricity,  and  told  the 
people  he  brought  down  fire  from  heaven.  For  the 
rest,  while  striking  the  imagination  of  the  crowd  by 
various  unheard-of  wonders,  he  had  not  up  to  now 
made  ill  use  of  his  power  for  any  personal  aims.  So 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


164 

this  man  came  to  the  great  Emperor  and  bowing 
before  him  as  before  a true  son  of  God,  declared  that 
in  the  secret  books  of  the  East  he  had  found  direct 
prophecies  about  him,  the  Emperor,  as  the  last 
saviour  and  universal  judge,  and  placed  himself  and 
his  art  at  his  service.  The  Emperor,  enchanted  with 
him,  received  him  as  a gift  from  heaven,  and  after 
conferring  upon  him  the  highest  titles,  refused  hence- 
forth to  be  parted  from  him.  The  peoples  of  the 
earth,  loaded  with  the  benefits  of  their  lord,  were  to 
have,  besides  general  peace  and  repletion,  the  possi- 
bility, moreover,  of  constant  enjoyment  of  the  most 
varied  and  unexpected  wonders  and  phenomena. 
So  ended  the  third  year  of  the  superman’s  reign. 

After  the  happy  solution  of  the  political  and  social 
questions,  the  religious  question  arose.  It  was 
raised  by  the  Emperor  himself,  particularly  in  its 
relation  to  Christianity.  At  this  time  Christianity 
found  itself  in  the  following  position.  In  face  of 
a very  considerable  diminution  in  the  number  of  its 
members — there  were  not  more  than  45,000,000 
Christians  left  in  all  the  world — morally  it  had  pulled 
itself  up  and  braced  itself  and  had  gained  in  quality 
what  it  had  lost  in  quantity.  There  were  no  longer 
numbered  among  Christians  any  people  who  were  not 
concerned  with  some  Christian  spiritual  interest. 
The  various  confessions  of  faith  diminished  pro- 
portionately in  numbers,  and  consequently  they 
preserved  approximately  their  former  numerical 
relation.  As  to  their  mutual  feelings,  although 
enmity  had  not  given  place  to  complete  reconcilia- 
tion yet  it  was  notably  softened  and  opposition  lost 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY  165 

its  sharpness.  The  Papacy  had  already  for  some 
time  been  driven  out  of  Rome,  and  after  many 
wanderings  had  found  an  asylum  in  Petersburg,  on 
condition  that  it  refrained  from  propaganda  both  in 
that  town  and  in  the  country.  In  Russia  it  became 
noticeably  simpler.  While  not  changing  the  essen- 
tially necessary  composition  of  its  college  and 
officers,  it  was  obliged  to  spiritualise  the  character 
of  its  activities  and  also  to  reduce  to  a minimum  its 
magnificent  ritual  and  ceremonial.  Many  strange 
and  enticing  customs,  although  not  formally 
abolished,  went  of  themselves  out  of  use.  In  all 
other  countries,  especially  in  North  America,  the 
Catholic  hierarchy  had  many  representatives,  firm  in 
will,  of  indomitable  energy  and  of  independent 
position,  who,  more  strongly  than  ever,  insisted  on 
the  unity  of  the  Catholic  Church,  and  preserved  for 
her  her  international  and  cosmopolitan  importance. 
As  to  Protestantism,  at  the  head  of  which  Germany 
continued  to  stand- — especially  after  the  reunion  of 
a considerable  part  of  the  Anglican  Church  with 
Catholicism — it  purged  itself  of  its  extreme  negative 
tendencies,  and  the  supporters  of  those  tendencies 
openly  descended  to  religious  indifference  and 
unbelief.  In  the  Evangelical  churches  there  re- 
mained only  sincere  believers,  at  whose  head  stood 
persons  who  combined  a wide  knowledge  with  a deep 
religious  consciousness,  and  who  tried  with  all  the 
more  effort  to  revive  in  themselves  a living  image 
of  the  ancient  and  original  Christianity.  Now  that 
political  events  had  changed  the  official  position 
of  the  Church,  Russian  Orthodoxy,  although  it 


ібб 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


had  lost  many  of  its  former  nominal  members,  yet 
experienced  the  joy  of  union  with  the  best  part 
of  the  Old  Believers,  and  even  with  many  sects 
of  a definitely  religious  tendency.  This  revivified 
Church,  though  it  did  not  grow  in  numbers,  did 
grow  in  spiritual  power,  and  this  power  it  showed 
especially  in  its  domestic  struggle  with  the  extreme 
sects  which  had  increased  amongst  the  people  and 
in  society,  sects  which  were  not  lacking  in  the 
demoniac  and  satanic  element. 

During  the  first  two  years  of  the  new  reign  the 
Christians,  frightened  and  depressed  by  the  series  of 
revolutions  and  wars  that  had  gone  before,  respected 
the  new  ruler  and  his  peaceful  reforms,  some  from 
a well-disposed  expectation,  others  with  absolute 
sympathy  and  burning  enthusiasm.  But  with  the 
appearance  of  the  great  magician  in  the  third  year, 
serious  apprehensions  and  antipathies  began  to  arise 
amongst  many  of  the  Orthodox,  Catholics  and 
Evangelicals.  The  evangelistic  and  apostolic  texts, 
which  spoke  of  the  prince  of  this  ѵюгМ  and  Anti- 
christ, began  to  be  read  with  more  attention  and 
discussed  with  animation.  From  certain  indications 
the  Emperor  suspected  a gathering  storm  and  re- 
solved to  clear  up  the  matter  quickly.  In  the 
beginning  of  the  fourth  year  of  his  reign  he  issued 
a manifesto  to  all  his  faithful  Christians,  л\ііЬоиі 
distinction  of  creed,  inviting  them  to  choose  or  desig- 
nate a representative,  with  full  powers  for  a general 
council  under  his  presidency.  His  residence  at  this 
time  had  been  changed  from  Rome  to  Jerusalem. 
Palestine  w'as  then  an  autonomous  State  inhabited 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY  167 

and  governed  principally  by  Jews.  Jerusalem  was  a 
free  and  had  been  made  an  imperial  city.  The 
Christian  holy  places  had  remained  inviolate,  but 
upon  the  spacious  platform  of  Kharam-esh-Sherif, 
from  Berket-Israin  and  the  present  barracks  on  one 
side  to  the  mosque  of  El-Ak  and  “ Solomon’s 
Stables  ” on  the  other,  was  erected  an  enormous 
edifice  including,  besides  the  two  ancient  small 
mosques,  a spacious  “ imperial  ” temple  for  the 
union  of  all  cults,  and  two  magnificent  imperial 
palaces  with  libraries,  museums  and  special  apart- 
ments for  magical  experiments  and  practices.  In 
this  half-temple,  half-palace,  the  general  council  was 
to  be  opened  on  the  14th  of  September.  Since  the 
Evangelical  religion  had  no  priesthood  in  the  true 
sense,  the  Catholic  and  Orthodox  hierarchy  resolved 
agreeably  to  the  wish  of  the  Emperor,  and  in  order 
to  give  a certain  homogeneity  to  the  representatives 
of  all  forms  of  Christianity,  to  allow  a certain 
number  of  laymen,  well  known  for  their  piety  and 
devoted  to  the  interests  of  the  Church,  to  have  a part 
in  the  council.  Once  laymen  were  allowed  it  was 
impossible  to  exclude  the  lower  clergy,  both  black 
and  white.  In  this  way  the  number  of  members 
of  the  council  exceeded  three  thousand,  and  about 
half  a million  of  Christian  pilgrims  deluged  Jeru- 
salem and  Palestine.  Among  the  members  of  the 
council  there  were  three  who  especially  stood  out. 
The  first  was  Pope  PjgterJI.,  by  right  at  the  head  of 
the  Catholic  part  of  the  council.  His  predecessor 
had  died  on  the  way  to  the  council,  and  a conclave 
having  been  convened  at  Damascus,  Cardinal 


іб8 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


Simone  Barione  was  unanimously  elected  and  took 
the  name  of  Pet^  He  was  of  humble  origin,  came 
from  the  Neapolitan  district,  and  had  become  known 
as  a preacher  of  the  Carmelite  Order  who  rendered 
great  service  in  the  struggle  against  a Satanist  sect 
which  was  growing  in  strength  in  Petersburg  and  the 
surrounding  country,  and  which  had  led  astray  not 
only  Orthodox  but  Catholics.  Made  Archbishop  of 
Mogilef  and  then  cardinal,  he  was  early  marked  out 
for  the  tiara.  He  was  a man  of  fifty  years  of  age,  of 
middle  height  and  robust  constitution,  red-faced, 
vith  a hooked  nose  and  thick  eyebrows.  Impetuous 
and  full  of  ardour,  he  spoke  fervently  with  bold 
gestures,  and  attracted  his  auditors  more  than  he 
persuaded  them.  The  new  Pope  expressed  both 
distrust  and  dislike  of  the  universal  sovereign ; 
especially  was  this  the  case  as  the  late  Pope,  when 
leaving  for  the  council,  had  yielded  to  the  insistence 
of  the  Emperor  and  appointed  as  a cardinal  the 
imperial  chancellor  and  universal  magician,  the 
esoteric  Bishop  Apollyon,  whom  Peter  considered  a 
doubtful  Catholic  but  undoubted  impostor.  The 
actual,  though  unofficial,  leader  of  the  Orthodox  was 
the  venerable  Jolm,  very  well  known  among  the 
Russian  people.  Although  he  was  officially  con- 
sidered a bishop  “ in  retirement,”  he  did  not  five 
in  any  monastery,  but  constantly  travelled  in  all 
directions.  There  were  various  legends  about  him. 
Some  believed  that  he  was  Fedor  Kouzmich  brought 
back  to  life,  namely,  the  Emperor  Alexander  I., 
who  had  been  born  about  three  centuries  before  that 
time.  Others  went  farther  and  affirmed  that  he  was 


' WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY  169 

the  Apostle  St.  John  the  Divine,  who,  never  having 
died,  now  appeared  openly  in  the  latter  days.  He 
himself  said  nothing  about  his  origin  or  youth.  He 
was  now  very  old,  but  hale  and  hearty,  with  yellowish, 
even  greenish  white  curls  and  beard,  tall,  thin  in 
body,  with  full,  rosy  cheeks  and  bright,  sparkling  eyes, 
sympathetic  both  in  the  expression  of  his  face  and 
in  his  conversation.  He  was  always  dressed  in  a white 
cassock  and  cloak.  At  the  head  of  the  Evangelical 
members  of  the  council  stood  the  learned  German 
theologian  Professor  Ernst  Pauli.  He  was  a dried- 
up,  little  old  man  of  medium  height,  with  an  enormous 
brow,  sharp  nose  and  clean-shaven  chin.  His  eyes 
were  distinguished  by  a certain  ferociously  kind- 
hearted  look.  He  constantly  rubbed  his  hands, 
shook  his  head,  twitched  his  eyebrows  in  a strange 
way  and  stuck  out  his  lips,  while  at  the  same  time 
with  flashing  eyes  he  gruffly  uttered  broken  sounds  ; 
So  ! nun  ! ja  ! so  also  ! He  was  dressed  solemnly 
— with  a white  tie  and  long  pastor’s  coat,  and  wore 
the  badges  of  certain  Orders. 

The  opening  of  the  council  was  inspiring.  Two- 
thirds  of  the  enormous  temple  consecrated  to  the 
“ union  of  all  cults  ” was  furnished  with  benches 
and  other  seats  for  the  members  of  the  council,  the 
remaining  third  was  occupied  by  a high  dais,  on  which 
behind  the  imperial  throne  and  another,  lower  down, 
for  the  great  magician — who  was  at  the  same  time 
cardinal  and  imperial  chancellor — there  were  rows 
of  armchairs  for  the  ministers,  courtiers  and 
secretaries  of  state,  and  on  one  side  a still  further 
line  of  armchairs,  the  use  of  which  was  unknown. 


170 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


In  the  choir  was  an  orchestra  and,  on  a neighbouring 
platform,  two  regiments  of  the  guards  were  drawn 
up  and  a battery  for  triumphant  salvos.  The 
members  of  the  council  had  already  celebrated 
religious  services  in  their  various  churches,  and  the 
opening  of  the  council  was  to  be  entirely  secular. 
When  the  Emperor  entered,  accompanied  by  the 
great  magician  and  his  suite,  the  orchestra  played 
the  “ March  of  United  Humanity,”  which  served  as 
the  imperial  international  hymn,  and  aU  the  mem- 
bers of  the  council  arose,  and  waving  their  hats 
shouted  three  times,  “ Vivat  ! Hurrah  ! Hoch  ! ” 
The  Emperor,  standing  by  the  throne,  stretching 
forth  his  hand  with  majestic  benevolence,  said  in  a 
resonant  and  pleasing  voice  : “ Christians  of  all 
cults ! My  well-beloved  subjects  and  brethren ! 
From  the  beginning  of  my  reign,  which  the  Most 
High  has  blessed  with  such  wonderful  and  note- 
worthy deeds,  not  once  have  I had  cause  to  be  dis- 
pleased with  you ; you  have  always  fulfilled  your  duty 
according  to  your  belief  and  conscience.  This  con- 
cerns me  but  little.  My  sincere  love  for  you,  dear 
brothers,  longs  for  some  return.  I desire  that  you, 
not  through  any  feeling  of  duty,  but  through  a feel- 
ing of  zealous  love,  should  recognise  me  as  your  true 
guide  in  every  matter  which  has  been  undertaken  for 
the  welfare  of  humanity.  But,  besides  that  which  I 
am  doing  for  everyone,  I should  like  to  show  you 
special  favour.  Christians  ! what  can  I do  to  make 
you  happy  ? What  shall  I give  you,  not  as  my 
subjects,  but  as  fellow-believers,  as  my  brethren. 
Christians ! tell  me  what  is  dearer  to  you  than  aught 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


171 


else  in  Christianity,  so  that  I may  in  this  matter 
direct  your  efforts. ’ ’ He  stopped  and  waited.  In  the 
temple  a dull  echo  arose.  The  members  of  the  council 
whispered  among  themselves.  Pope  Peter,  passion- 
ately gesticulating,  was  explaining  something  to 
those  about  him.  Professor  Pauli  shook  his  head 
and  smacked  his  lips  with  exasperation.  The  vener- 
able John,  bending  over  the  Eastern  bishops  and 
monks,  was  quietly  suggesting  something  to  them. 
Having  waited  several  minutes,  the  Emperor  turned 
to  the  council  and,  with  the  same  caressing  tone,  in 
which  nevertheless  there  sounded  a scarcely  per- 
ceptible note  of  irony,  said  : “ Dear  Christians,  I 
understand  how  difficult  it  is  for  you  to  give  a direct 
answer.  I desire  to  aid  you  in  this  matter.  You, 
from  time  immemorial,  unhappily  have  been  so 
divided  into  various  sects  and  parties  that  you  have 
not  perhaps  a common  object  to  which  you  are  all 
attached.  But  if  you  are  not  able  to  agree  among 
yourselves,  then  I hope  to  bring  all  parties  into  agree- 
ment, as  I shall  show  to  them  all  the  same  love  and 
the  same  readiness  to  satisfy  the  true  aspirations  of 
each.  Dear  Christians,  I know  that  for  many,  and 
not  the  meanest  of  you,  the  thing  that  is  dearer  than 
aught  else  in  Christianity  is  that  spiritual  authority 
which  it  gives  to  its  lawful  representatives,  not  for 
their  own  profit,  of  course,  but  for  the  common  good, 
since  upon  this  authority  is  founded  a regular 
spiritual  order  and  moral  discipline  indispensable  to 
all.  Dear  brother  Catholics  ! O,  how  I understand 
your  point  of  view,  and  how  I should  Ііке  to  rest  my 
empire  on  the  authority  of  your  spiritual  head  ! In 


172 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


order  that  you  should  not  think  that  this  is  flattery 
and  empty  phrases,  we  solemnly  declare  that  it  is 
agreeable  to  our  autocratic  will  that  the  supreme 
bishop  of  all  Catholics,  the  Pope  of  Rome,  shall  now 
ascend  his  throne  in  Rome  with  all  the  former  rights 
and  privileges  of  his  position  and  chair,  whensoever 
granted  by  our  predecessors,  beginning  with  the 
Emperor  Constantine  the  Great.  And  from  you, 
brother  Catholics,  I desire,  in  return  for  this,  only  a 
true  and  heartfelt  acknowledgment  of  myself  as  your 
sole  protector  and  defender.  If  there  is  anyone  here 
who  acknowledges  me  as  such  in  his  heart  and  in  his 
conscience,  let  him  come  hither  to  me.”  And  he 
pointed  to  the  empty  places  on  the  dais.  With  joy- 
ful shouts  of  Gr alias  agimus  Domine!  Salvu7n  fac 
magnum  imperatorem"  almost  all  the  princes  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  the  cardinals  and  bishops,  a great 
part  of  the  believing  laymen,  and  more  than  half  of 
the  monks  ascended  the  dais,  and,  after  making  low 
bows  in  the  direction  of  the  Emperor,  took  their 
places.  But  below  in  the  middle  of  the  assembly, 
erect  and  immovable  as  a marble  statue,  sat  in  his 
place  the  Pope,  Peter  II.  All  who  had  surrounded 
him  were  on  the  dais.  But  the  thinned  ranks  of 
monks  and  laymen  which  w^ere  left  below  closed 
around  him,  forming  a tight  ring,  from  whence  was 
heard  suppressed  whispering  : ” prcBvalebunt, 
7ion  prcBvalebimt  рогісг  inferni.” 

Glancing  in  amazement  at  the  motionless  Pope,  the 
Emperor  again  raised  his  voice  : ” Dear  brethren,  I 
know  there  are  among  you  those  to  whom  the  holy 
tradition  of  Christianity,  with  its  old  sjunbols,  hymns 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


173 


and  prayers,  icons  and  divine  ritual  is  dearer  than 
aught  else.  What,  indeed,  can  be  dearer  than  this  to 
the  devout  soul  ? Know,  then,  that  to-day  a decree 
has  been  signed  by  me  and  large  sums  allotted  for  a 
universal  museum  of  Christian  archaeology  in  our 
glorious  imperial  city  of  Constantinople  for  the  pur- 
pose of  collecting,  studying  and  preserving  all  the 
monuments  of  ecclesiastical  antiquity,  preferably 
those  of  the  East ; and  I further  ask  you  to  choose 
to-morrow  from  amongst  yourselves  a committee  to 
consider  with  me  those  measures  which  it  is  necessary 
to  take  for  the  possible  approximation  of  the  tradi- 
tions and  institutions  of  the  holy  Orthodox  Church  to 
modern  conditions,  morals  and  customs.  Brothers 
of  the  Orthodox  faith,  you  who  have  my  wishes  at 
heart,  who  feel  in  your  hearts  that  you  can  call  me 
your  true  guide  and  lord,  come  up  hither.”  A large 
part  of  the  hierarchy  of  the  East  and  North,  half  of 
the  former  Old  Believers  and  more  than  half  of  the 
Orthodox  priests,  monks  and  laymen  with  joyful 
cries  ascended  the  dais,  glancing  proudly  at  the 
Catholics  who  were  seated  there.  But  the  venerable 
John  did  not  move  and  gave  a deep  sigh.  And  when 
the  crowd  round  him  were  greatly  thinned,  he  left  his 
bench  and  seated  himself  nearer  to  Pope  Peter  and 
his  circle.  After  him  followed  the  others  who  had 
not  gone  upon  the  dais.  Again  the  Emperor  began 
to  speak.  “ I know  there  are  some  of  you  dear 
Christians  to  whom  the  personal  assurance  of 
truth  and  free  investigation  of  the  Scriptures  is  of 
all  things  the  dearest  in  Christianity.  I think 
there  is  no  need  to  expatiate  upon  the  matter. 


174 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


Possibly  you  know  that  in  my  early  youth  I wrote  a 
long  treatise  on  Biblical  criticism,  which  made  at  the 
time  a certain  sensation  and  was  the  foundation 
upon  which  my  reputation  was  built.  Probably,  in 
recognition  of  this,  the  university  of  Tubingen  has 
sent  me,  at  this  time,  a request  to  accept  from  it  the 
honorary  diploma  of  Doctor  of  Theology.  I com- 
manded an  answer  to  be  given  that  I accepted  it 
with  pleasure  and  gratitude.  And  to-day,  in  addi- 
tion to  the  museum  of  Christian  archaeology,  I have 
allotted  1,500,000  marks  from  the  yearly  budget 
for  the  foundation  of  a universal  institute  for  the 
free  investigation  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  from  all 
possible  points  of  view  and  in  all  possible  directions 
and  for  instruction  in  all  allied  sciences.  If  there 
are  any  of  you  to  whom  my  sincere  goodw^ill  is 
pleasing  and  who  are  able  honestly  to  acknowledge 
me  as  their  sovereign  leader,  I ask  them  to  come 
hither  to  the  new  Doctor  of  Theology ; ” and  a strange 
smile  passed  lightly  over  the  beautiful  lips  of  the 
great  man.  More  than  half  of  the  learned  theologians 
moved,  though  with  a certain  hesitation  and  waver- 
ing, towards  the  dais.  All  looked  round  at  Professor 
Pauli,  who  remained  as  if  rooted  to  his  seat.  The 
learned  theologians  who  had  ascended  the  dais  were 
filled  with  confusion,  and  suddenly  one,  waving  his 
hand,  leapt  straight  down  past  the  steps  and 
ran  to  Professor  Pauli  and  the  minority  лѵЫсЬ 
remained  beside  him.  The  latter  raised  his  head, 
and  rising  with  a somewhat  vague  movement, 
went  past  the  empty  benches,  accompanied  by  his 
co-believers  who  had  resisted,  and  sat  down  wth 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


175 


them  near  the  venerable  John  and  Pope  Peter  and 
their  circle. 

The  great  majority  of  the  council,  among  which 
were  included  almost  all  the  hierarchy  of  the  East 
and  West,  found  themselves  on  the  dais.  Below 
there  remained  only  three  groups,  who  were  coming 
together  and  pressing  about  John,  Pope  Peter  and 
Professor  Pauli. 

The  Emperor  turned  to  them  and  said  in  a sad 
tone:  “What  more  can  I do  for  you?  Strange 
people  ! What  do  you  want  of  me  ? I know  not. 
You  yourselves,  who  are  forsaken  by  the  majority  of 
your  brethren  and  leaders  and  are  condemned  by 
popular  sentiment,  tell  me  what  is  dearer  to  you  than 
aught  else  in  Christianity  ? ” Then,  like  a white 
taper,  the  venerable  John  arose  and  gently  answered : 
“ For  us  the  dearest  thing  of  all  in  Christianity  is 
Christ  Himself — He  alone,  all  is  from  Him,  for 
we  know  that  in  Him  dwells  all  the  fulness  of  the 
Godhead  in  the  flesh.  From  thee,  sire,  we  are 
ready  to  accept  every  good  thing,  if  only  in  thy 
generous  hand  we  recognise  the  holy  hand  of  Christ. 
And  to  thy  question  : ‘ What  art  thou  able  to  do  for 
us  ? ’ — here  is  our  answer  : ‘ Confess  now  before  us, 
Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  Who  came  in  the  flesh. 
Who  rose  from  the  dead,  and  Who  will  come  again. 
Confess  Him,  and  we,  with  love  will  receive  you  as  the 
true  forerunner  of  His  glorious  coming.’  ’’  He  was 
silent  and  fixed  his  eyes  on  the  face  of  the  Emperor. 
Something  untoward  had  happened  to  the  latter. 
Within  him  arose  a diabolical  tempest,  such  as  he  had 
experienced  on  that  fatal  night.  He  completely  lost 


176 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


all  inner  equilibrium,  and  all  his  thoughts  were  con- 
centrated upon  preventing  himself  from  being  de- 
prived of  his  external  self-possession  or  from  betray- 
ing himself  inopportunely.  He  made  a superhuman 
effort  not  to  throw  himself  with  wild  howls  upon  the 
speaker,  and  tear  him  to  pieces  with  his  teeth.  Sud- 
denly he  heard  a known  but  unearthly  voice  : “Be 
silent  and  fear  not.”  He  kept  silent.  Only  his  face, 
which  was  dark  and  deathlike,  became  all  distorted, 
and  sparks  flew  from  his  eyes.  Whilst  J ohn  had  been 
speaking  the  great  magician,  wrapped  in  his  immense 
tri-coloured  mantle,  which  covered  the  cardinal’s 
crimson,  seemed  to  be  manipulating  something  under 
it ; his  eyes  flashed  in  deep  concentration  and  his  lips 
moved.  Through  the  open  windows  of  the  temple  an 
enormous  black  cloud  could  be  seen  coming,  and  it 
soon  became  dark.  John  did  not  turn  his  astonished 
and  frightened  eyes  from  the  face  of  the  Emperor,  till 
suddenly  he  sprang  back  in  horror,  and  looking  round 
cried  out  in  a stifled  voice : “ Little  children,  it  is 
Antichrist.”  At  this  moment,  simultaneously  with 
a deafening  clap  of  thunder  a great  flash  of  lightning 
enveloped  the  old  man.  For  an  instant  all  were 
stunned,  and  when  the  dazed  Christians  came  to 
themselves,  the  venerable  John  lay  dead. 

The  Emperor,  pale  but  composed,  turned  to  the 
council ; “You  have  witnessed  the  judgment  of 
God.  I desired  not  the  death  of  anyone,  but  my 
heavenly  Father  will  avenge  His  well-beloved  Son. 
The  matter  is  decided.  Who  wiU  contend  against 
the  Most  High  ? Secretaries,  write : ‘ The  General 
Council  of  All  Christians,  after  fire  from  heaven 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


177 


destroyed  the  foolish  opponent  of  divine  majesty, 
unanimously  recognise  the  autocratic  Emperor  of 
Rome  and  of  all  the  World  as  its  supreme  guide  and 
lord.’  ” Suddenly  a loud  and  distinct  word  is  heard 
throughout  the  temple  : " Contradicitur  ! ” Pope 

Peter  II.  arose,  and  with  flushed  face,  trembling  with 
anger,  raised  his  staff  in  the  direction  of  the  Emperor. 
“ Our  only  Lord  is  Jesus  Christ,  Son  of  the  Living 
God.  And  thou  hast  heard  who  thou  art.  Away 
from  us  ! Cain,  fratricide  ! Away,  instrument  of  the 
devil ! By  the  power  of  Christ,  I,  the  servant  of  the 
servants  of  God,  cast  thee  out  for  ever,  abominable 
dog,  from  the  city  of  God,  and  deliver  thee  up  to  thy 
father  Satan.  Anathema!  Anathema!  Anathema!” 
While  he  was  speaking  the  great  magician  moved 
uneasily  under  his  mantle,  and  louder  than  the  last 
anathema  the  thunder  rumbled,  and  the  last  Pope 
feU  lifeless.  “ Thus  by  the  hand  of  my  Father  are 
all  my  enemies  destroyed,”  said  the  Emperor. 
” Pereant,  pereant,”  cried  the  trembling  princes  of 
the  Church.  He  turned  and,  leaning  upon  the 
shoulder  of  the  great  magician,  accompanied  by  aU 
the  throng,  went  out  slowly  by  a door  behind  the 
dais.  In  the  temple  there  remained  the  two  dead 
bodies  and  the  narrow  circle  of  Christians,  half  dead 
with  terror.  The  only  one  who  was  not  confused  was 
Professor  Pauli.  It  was  as  if  the  general  horror 
had  aroused  aU  the  forces  of  his  soul.  He  had  changed 
outwardly,  he  had  an  exalted  and  inspired  look. 
With  a resolute  step  he  ascended  the  dais,  and 
having  taken  a seat  vacated  by  one  of  the  secre- 
taries of  state,  he  took  a sheet  of  paper  and  began  to 


w.c. 


N 


178 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


write  something  on  it.  Having  finished,  he  got  up 
and  read  out  in  a loud  voice  : ‘‘To  the  glory  of  our 
only  Saviour,  Jesus  Christ.  The  General  Council 
of  God’s  Church,  gathered  together  in  Jerusalem, 
after  our  blessed  brother  John,  representative  of 
Eastern  Christianity,  had  detected  in  the  great 
deceiver  and  enemy  of  God  the  true  Antichrist  pre- 
dicted in  God’s  word,  and  after  our  blessed  father, 
Peter,  the  representative  of  Western  Christianity, 
had  lawfully  and  rightfully  consigned  him  to  eternal 
separation  from  the  Church  of  God  ; now,  before 
these  two  witnesses  of  Christ,  who  have  been  killed 
for  the  truth,  we  decide  to  break  off  relations  with 
his  cursed  and  abominable  assembly,  and  to  go 
into  the  wilderness,  there  to  await  the  imminent 
coming  of  our  true  Lord,  Jesus  Christ.”  Animation 
filled  the  crowd,  and  loud  cries  broke  forth  ; “ Ad- 
veniat ! adveniat  cito.  Komm,  Ren  Jesu,  komm ! 
Come,  Lord  Jesus  ! ” 

Professor  Pauli  wrote  and  then  read  out ; ‘‘  Hav- 
ing adopted  this  first  and  last  act  of  the  last  general 
council,  we  sign  our  names  ” — and  he  made  a sign  of 
invitation  to  the  assembly.  AU  went  up  on  the 
platform  and  signed.  At  the  end,  in  large  Gothic 
script,  was  written — ‘‘  decorum  defunctorum  testium 
locum  tenens,  Ernst  Pauli”  ‘‘  Now  let  us  go  vith 
our  ark  of  the  last  covenant,”  he  said,  pointing  to 
the  two  who  had  died.  The  bodies  were  raised  on 
stretchers.  Slowly,  with  Latin  chants,  and  vith 
German  and  Slavonic  hymns,  the  Christians  set 
forth  to  the  entrance  of  Kharam-esh-Sherif.  Here 
the  procession  was  stopped  by  a secretary  of  state 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


1/9 


sent  by  the  Emperor  and  escorted  by  an  officer, 
with  a platoon  of  guards.  The  soldiers  stopped  at 
the  entrance,  and  the  secretary  of  state  read  out  as 
follows  from  an  elevated  position  : “ The  command  of 
his  divine  majesty  ! For  the  instruction  of  Christian 
people  and  to  protect  them  against  wickedly-disposed 
persons  who  are  causing  disturbances  and  seducing 
the  people,  we  have  recognised  it  is  for  the  public 
good  to  exhibit  publicly  the  bodies  of  the  two  agita- 
tors, killed  by  fire  from  heaven,  in  Christian  Street 
{Kharet-an-N asara) , at  the  entrance  of  the  great 
temple  of  that  religion,  named  The  Holy  Sepulchre 
or  The  Resurrection,  so  that  all  may  be  persuaded  of 
the  reality  of  their  death.  Their  obstinate  adherents, 
wickedly  refusing  all  our  favours  and  madly  closing 
their  eyes  to  the  obvious  signs  of  divinity,  have, 
by  being  obedient  to  those  who  were  killed  by  fire 
from  heaven,  put  themselves  outside  our  mercy  and 
protection  in  the  face  of  the  heavenly  Father. 
They  shall  be  given  full  freedom  with  the  single 
prohibition,  on  account  of  the  public  weal,  of  not 
being  allowed  to  live  in  cities  or  other  inhabited 
places,  so  that  they  may  not  trouble  or  seduce 
innocent  and  simple-minded  people  with  their  evil 
inventions.”  When  he  had  finished,  eight  soldiers 
at  the  command  of  the  officer  approached  the 
. stretchers  bearing  the  bodies. 

” What  is  written  is  being  fulfilled,”  said  Professor 
Pauli,  and  the  Christians  who  bore  the  stretchers 
handed  them  over  in  silence  to  the  soldiers,  who 
withdrew  through  the  north-west  gates  ; but  the 
Christians,  issuing  from  the  north-east  gates. 


i8o 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


hurriedly  set  out  from  the  city,  and,  passing  the 
Mount  of  Olives,  went  towards  Jericho,  along  a road 
which  previously  had  been  cleared  of  the  mob  by 
gendarmes  and  two  cavalry  regiments.  On  the 
barren  hills  near  Jericho  it  was  decided  to  wait  for  a 
few  days.  The  following  morning  Christian  pilgrims 
arrived  from  Jerusalem  and  related  what  had  taken 
place  in  Zion.  After  the  court  dinner,  all  the  mem- 
bers of  the  assembly  were  invited  to  the  great  throne 
room  (near  the  supposed  place  of  Solomon’s  throne), 
and  the  Emperor,  turning  to  the  representatives  of 
the  Catholic  hierarchy,  declared  that  the  welfare  of 
the  Church  evidently  demanded  from  them  a speedy 
choice  of  a worthy  successor  of  the  Apostle  Peter  ; 
that,  according  to  the  circumstances  of  the  time,  the 
election  would  have  to  be  summary ; that  the  pre- 
sence of  himself,  the  Emperor,  as  leader  and  repre- 
sentative of  the  whole  Christian  world,  abundantly 
made  up  for  any  omissions  of  ritual ; and  that  he, 
in  the  name  of  all  Christians,  proposed  that  the 
Sacred  College  should  elect  his  well-beloved  friend 
and  brother  Apollyon,  thus  making  the  close  bond  a 
lasting  one  and  the  union  between  the  Church  and 
the  empire  indissoluble  for  their  common  good. 
The  Sacred  College  wthdrew  to  a special  apartment 
for  the  conclave,  and  returned  in  half  an  hour  vith 
the  new  Pope  Apollyon.  WTilst  the  balloting  was 
taking  place,  the  Emperor  gently,  visely  and 
eloquently  persuaded  the  Orthodox  and  Evangelical 
representatives,  in  \dew  of  the  great  new  era  of 
Christian  history,  to  put  an  end  to  their  divisions, 
trusting  to  his  word  that  Apollyon  would  be  able  to 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


i8i 


abolish  for  ever  all  the  historical  abuses  of  the  papal 
power.  Persuaded  by  this  speech,  the  represen- 
tatives of  Orthodoxy  and  Protestantism  drew  up  an 
Act  for  the  union  of  the  Churches,  and  when  Apollyon, 
accompanied  by  the  cardinals,  appeared  in  the  throne 
room,  amidst  the  joyful  cries  of  the  whole  assembly, 
a Greek  bishop  and  an  evangelical  pastor  tendered 
him  their  document.  “Accipio  et  approbo  et  Iceti- 
ficatur  cor  meum,”  said  Apollyon,  signing  the  paper. 
“ I am  as  truly  Orthodox  and  Evangelical  as  I am 
Catholic,”  he  added,  and  affectionately  exchanged 
kisses  with  the  Greek  and  the  German.  Afterwards 
he  went  to  the  Emperor,  who  embraced  him  and 
held  him  a long  time  in  his  arms.  At  this  time  some 
shining  spots  began  to  float  about  the  palace  and  the 
temple  in  all  directions  ; they  grew  and  changed  into 
bright  forms  of  strange  things  ; flowers  unseen  upon 
earth  showered  down  from  above,  filling  the  air  with 
an  unknown  perfume.  From  on  high  resounded 
ravishing  sounds  of  musical  instruments,  unheard 
up  to  that  time,  which  went  straight  to  the  soul  and 
transported  the  heart,  and  the  angelic  voices  of  an 
invisible  choir  sang  the  praises  of  the  new  lord  of 
heaven  and  earth.  Meanwhile  a strange  subter- 
ranean rumbling  was  heard  in  the  north-west  corner 
of  the  middle  palace  under  kubet-el-aruakh — 
i.e.,  kupolom  dush,  where,  according  to  Mussulman 
tradition,  was  the  entrance  into  hell.  When  the 
assembly,  by  invitation  of  the  Emperor,  moved  in 
that  direction,  aU  clearly  heard  innumerable  high 
and  piercing  voices — not  childish,  not  devilish — 
which  were  crying  out  ” The  time  has  come,  release 


i82 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


us,  our  saviours.”  But  when  АроПуоп,  pressing  close 
against  the  wall,  cried  out  something  three  times 
in  an  unknown  tongue,  the  voices  were  silent  and  the 
rumbling  ceased.  Meanwhile  an  enormous  multitude 
of  people  from  all  quarters  had  surrounded  Kharam- 
esh-Sherif.  At  the  approach  of  night  the  Emperor, 
together  with  the  new  Pope,  went  out  on  the  eastern 
staircase,  where  his  presence  aroused  a storm  of 
enthusiasm.  He  bowed  affably  on  aU  sides,  and  then 
Apollyon,  from  a large  basket  brought  to  him  by  the 
cardinal  deacons,  repeatedly  took  and  threw  into 
the  air  magnificent  roman  candles,  rockets  and 
fountains  of  fire,  which  had  been  set  alight  by 
contact  with  his  hand,  and  which  лѵеге  sometimes 
pearly  phosphorescent,  sometimes  all  the  colours 
of  the  rainbow.  And  all  of  them,  when  they 
reached  the  earth,  changed  into  numberless  parti- 
coloured leaves  vdth  full  and  unconditional  indul- 
gences for  all  sins,  past,  present  and  to  come.  The 
popular  joy  passed  aU  bounds.  It  is  true  that  cer- 
tain people  affirmed  that  they  saw  with  their  own 
eyes  the  indulgences  change  into  most  repulsive  toads 
and  serpents.  Nevertheless,  the  vast  majority  wus 
in  ecstasies  and  the  popular  festival  continued  for 
several  days,  during  which  time  the  new  wonder- 
working Pope  attained  to  things  so  Avonderful  and 
improbable  that  to  mention  them  would  be  alto- 
gether useless.  Meanwffile  on  the  deserted  heights 
of  Jericho,  the  Christians  gave  themselves  up  to 
prayer  and  fasting.  On  the  evening  of  the  fourth 
day  as  it  became  dark.  Professor  Pauli  and  ten  com- 
panions, mounted  on  asses  and  taking  with  them  a 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY  183 

cart,  stole  into  Jerusalem  and  through  side  streets 
past  Kharam-esh-Sherif,  came  out  on  Kharet-en- 
Nasar  and  approached  the  entrance  to  the  Church  of 
the  Resurrection,  where  on  the  pavement  lay  the 
bodies  of  Pope  Peter  and  the  venerable  John.  The 
street  at  this  hour  was  empty,  everybody  had  gone 
to  Kharam^'sh-Sherif.  The  soldiers  on  guard  had 
fallen  into  a deep  sleep.  Those  who  came  for  the 
bodies  found  them  entirely  untouched  by  corruption, 
and  not  even  stiff  or  heavy.  Having  raised  them 
upon  the  stretchers  and  having  covered  them  with 
the  mantles  they  had  brought,  they  returned  by  the 
same  roundabout  way  to  their  own  people,  but 
scarcely  had  they  lowered  the  stretchers  on  the 
ground  than  the  spirit  of  life  entered  into  the  dead. 
They  moved  and  attempted  to  throw  off  the  cloaks 
in  which  they  were  wrapped.  All  with  joyful  cries 
began  to  assist  them,  and  both  having  come  to  life, 
stood  up  on  their  feet,  whole  and  sound.  And  the 
venerable  John  began  to  speak ; “ So,  little  children, 
we  have  not  parted,  and  now  I say  to  you,  it  is  time 
to  carry  out  Christ’s  last  prayer  about  His  followers, 
that  they  should  be  one  even  as  He  with  the  Father 
is  one.  So  for  the  sake  of  this  unity  of  Christ  we 
revere,  little  children,  our  well-beloved  brother, 
Peter.  May  he  feed  the  last  of  Christ’s  sheep.” 
And  he  embraced  Peter.  Then  Professor  Pauli 
went  up  to  him.  “ Tu  est  Petrus,”  he  said  to  the  Pope, 
“ jetzt  ist  es  ja  griindlich  erwiesen  und  ausser  jedern 
Zweifel  gesetzt.”  He  seized  his  hand  firmly  with  his 
own  right  hand  and  gave  his  left  to  the  venerable 
John  with  the  words  : ” So  also,  Vdterchen,  nun 


184 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


sind  wir  ja  Bins  in  Christo.”  Thus  was  accomplished 
the  union  of  the  churches  in  the  darkness  of  the  night 
on  a high  and  lonely  place.  But  the  darkness  was 
suddenly  lightened  by  a bright  splendour  and  there 
appeared  a great  wonder  in  heaven ; a woman  clothed 
in  the  sun  with  the  moon  under  her  feet  and  a 
crown  of  twelve  stars  on  her  head.  The  apparition 
remained  for  some  time  in  one  place  and  then  moved 
slowly  towards  the  south.  Pope  Peter  raised  his 
staff  and  cried  out : “ There  is  our  banner,  let  us 
follow  it.”  And  he  went  in  the  direction  of  the 
vision,  accompanied  by  both  the  old  men  and  the 
whole  company  of  Christians,  to  the  mountain  of 
of  God — to  Sinai. 

{Here  the  reader  stopped.) 

Lady. — Why  don’t  you  continue  ? 

Mr.  Z. — The  manuscript  doesn’t  continue. 
Father  Pansophia  did  not  succeed  in  finishing  his 
tale.  When  he  was  already  ill  he  told  me  what  more 
he  wished  to  write  “ when  I am  better.”  But  he  did 
not  get  well,  and  the  end  of  the  tale  was  buried  vith 
him  in  the  Danilof  monastery. 

Lady. — But,  of  course,  you  remember  лvhat  he 
told  you,  so  let  us  hear  it. 

Mr.  Z. — I remember  only  the  principal  features. 
After  the  spiritual  leaders  and  representatives  of 
Christianity  withdrew  to  the  Arabian  desert,  where 
crowds  of  believers  jealous  for  the  truth  flocked  to 
them  from  all  countries,  the  new  Pope  was  able, 
without  any  obstacle,  to  pervert  by  his  wonders  and 
prodigies  all  the  superficial  Christians  who  had  not 
been  disillusioned  by  Antichrist,  and  who  remained 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


185 


with  him.  He  declared  that,  by  the  power  of  the 
keys,  he  had  opened  the  door  between  life  on  earth 
and  life  beyond  the  grave,  and  in  fact,  communica- 
tion between  the  living  and  dead,  and  also  between 
people  and  demons  had  been  accomplished  with  the 
usual  manifestations,  and  new  unheard-of  scenes  of 
mystical  debauchery  and  demonolatry  took  place. 
But  scarcely  had  the  Emperor  begun  to  feel  himself 
standing  upon  a firm  religious  foundation,  and 
scarcely  had  he  according  to  the  persistent  inspira- 
tion of  his  mysterious  “ father’s  ” voice,  declared 
himself  the  only  true  incarnation  of  supreme  and 
universal  Divinity,  than  a new  misfortune  fell  upon 
him  from  an  unexpected  quarter  : the  revolt  of 
the  Hebrews.  This  nation,  whose  numbers  at  that 
time  had  reached  thirty  millions,  was  not  entirely 
ignorant  of  the  preparations  for  and  the  consolida- 
tion of  the  world-wide  successes  of  the  superman. 
When  he  moved  to  Jerusalem,  secretly  spreading  the 
report  in  Hebrew  circles  that  his  principal  problem 
was  to  establish  the  world-wide  dominion  of 
Israel,  the  Hebrews  recognised  him  as  the  Messiah, 
and  their  enthusiastic  devotion  to  him  knew  no 
bounds.  But  suddenly  they  rose  in  rebellion, 
breathing  anger  and  vengeance.  This  revolution, 
undoubtedly  predicted  in  the  Scriptures  and  tra- 
dition, is  set  forth  by  Father  Pansophia  with,  it 
may  be,  too  much  simplicity  and  realism.  The 
trouble  was,  that  the  Hebrews,  deeming  the  Emperor 
entirely  Jewish  by  race,  discovered  by  chance  that 
he  was  not  even  circumcised.  That  very  day 
Jerusalem,  and  the  following  day,  all  Palestine,  was 


w.c. 


о 


i86 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


in  revolt.  The  boundless  and  fervent  devotion  to 
the  Saviour  of  Israel,  to  the  promised  Messiah,  was 
changed  into  equally  boundless  and  fervent  hatred 
of  the  wily  deceiver  and  brazen  impostor.  All  Israel 
rose  as  one  man,  and  its  enemies  saw  uith  amaze- 
ment that  the  soul  of  Israel,  in  its  depths,  lived  not 
by  calculations  and  the  desires  of  Mammon,  but  by 
the  force  of  a concentrated  feeling — in  the  expecta- 
tion of  and  passion  for  its  eternal  Messianic  faith. 
The  Emperor,  who  had  not  expected  such  an  out- 
break, at  once  lost  his  self-possession  and  issued  an 
edict  condemning  to  death  all  insubordinate  Jews  and 
Christians.  Many  thousands  and  tens  of  thousands 
who  had  not  succeeded  in  arming  themselves  were 
slaughtered  without  mercy.  But  soon  an  army  of  a 
minion  Hebrews  occupied  Jerusalem,  and  locked  up 
Antichrist  in  Kharam-esh-Sherif.  He  had  at  his 
disposal  only  a part  of  the  guards,  who  were  unable 
to  overcome  the  masses  of  the  enemy.  By  the  help 
of  the  magic  art  of  his  Pope  the  Emperor  succeeded 
in  passing  through  the  lines  of  his  besiegers,  and 
quickly  appeared  again  in  Syria  with  an  innumerable 
army  of  pagans  of  different  races.  The  Hebrews 
went  forth  to  meet  him  with  small  hope  of  success. 
But  hardly  had  the  vanguard  of  both  armies  come 
together,  when  an  earthquake  of  imprecedented 
violence  occurred,  the  crater  of  an  enormous  volcano 
opened  by  tlie  Dead  Sea,  about  which  lay  the 
imperial  army,  and  streams  of  fire  flowed  together 
in  one  flaming  lake  and  swallowed  up  the  Emperor 
himself  and  his  numberless  forces,  together  with  Pope 
Apollyon,  who  always  accompanied  him,  and  for 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


187 


whom  all  his  magic  was  of  no  avail.  Meanwhile, 
the  Hebrews  hastened  to  Jerusalem  in  fear  and 
trembling,  calling  for  salvation  to  the  God  of  Israel. 
When  the  holy  city  was  already  in  sight,  the  heavens 
were  rent  by  vivid  lightning,  from  the  east  to  the 
west,  and  they  saw  Christ  coming  towards  them  in 
royal  apparel,  and  with  the  wounds  from  the  nails 
in  His  outstretched  hands.  At  the  same  time,  from 
Sinai  to  Zion,  went  the  company  of  Christians,  led 
by  Peter,  John  and  Paul,  and  from  various  other 
parts  hurried  more  triumphant  multitudes  : these 
consisted  of  all  the  Jews  and  Christians  who  had  been 
killed  by  Antichrist.  They  lived  and  reigned  with 
Christ  for  a thousand  years.  With  this  Father 
Pansophia  wished  to  end  his  narrative,  which  had 
for  its  object,  not  a universal  cataclysm  of  creation, 
but  the  conclusion  of  our  historical  process,  which 
consists  of  the  appearance,  glorification  and  destruc- 
tion of  Antichrist. 

Politician. — And  do  you  think  that  this  conclu- 
sion is  so  near  ? 

Mr.  Z. — Well,  there  will  stiU  be  much  chatter  and 
fuss  on  the  stage,  but  the  whole  drama  is  written  to 
the  end,  and  neither  the  actors  nor  the  audience  will 
be  permitted  to  change  anything  in  it. 

Lady. —But  what  is  the  absolute  meaning  of 
this  drama  ? I still  do  not  understand  why  Anti- 
christ hates  God  so  much,  while  he  himself  is 
essentially  good,  not  evil. 

Mr.  Z. — ^That’s  the  point,  he  is  not  essentially  so. 
AU  the  meaning  is  in  that.  I take  back  my  pre- 
vious words  that  “ you  cannot  explain  Antichrist  by 


i88 


WAR  AND  CHRISTIANITY 


proverbs  alone.”  He  can  be  explained  by  a simple 
proverb,  “ AU  is  not  gold  that  glitters.”  You  know 
this  glitter  of  counterfeit  good ; take  it  away  and 
no  real  force  remains — none. 

General. — But  you  notice,  too,  upon  what  the 
curtain  falls  in  this  historical  drama— upon  war — 
the  meeting  of  two  armies.  So  the  end  of  our 
conversation  has  come  back  to  where  it  was  at  the 
beginning.  How  does  this  please  you.  Prince  ? . . . 
Good  heavens  ! where’s  the  Prince  ? 

Politician. — Didn’t  you  see,  then  ? He  went  out 
quietly  in  that  pathetic  passage  where  the  venerable 
John  presses  Antichrist  to  the  waU.  I did  not  ^vish 
to  interrupt  at  the  time,  and  afterwards  I forgot. 

General. — He  has  taken  to  flight,  I swear  it, 
and  that’s  for  the  second  time.  He  mastered 
himself  the  first  time  and  came  back.  But  this 
last  was  too  much  for  him.  Well ! Well  ! 


liKADBUKV,  AGNEW,  & CO.  LD. , PRINTERS,  LONDON  AND  TONBRIDGE, 


i?ste  Due 


W У»  ■ 

59 

»/ 

UCt27’30 

К 

3st 

Л/ОѴ  5 

t- 

L.  B.  Cat.  No.  1137 

{ 


г 

I 172.4  S689 


4548?> 


